Stop Quitting the race if you're the host

[Famine]

I find it incredible that someone thinks that punishing everyone for one person's actions is justifiable. If this catches on, next thing we know someone will be invading a country just to hunt down one man.

I lolled.

I'm idly curious. Would you agree that someone racing ought to be able expect a clean/fair race? Would you further agree that they should not be forced into wasting their bandwidth in a race that isn't clean/fair if they don't want to?


Assuming you do (because I can't imagine any reason why you wouldn't) why does this change because you've been arbitrarily assigned "host" status?

 

[CoccoBill]

I lolled.

I'm idly curious. Would you agree that someone racing ought to be able expect a clean/fair race? Would you further agree that they should not be forced into wasting their bandwidth in a race that isn't clean/fair if they don't want to?

I share your curiosity. Why do you think the other players can't decide for themselves whether they want to continue in the the event that someone starts ramming people? Why do you think you know better than them what irritates them and what they think the fair course of action is?

Assuming you do (because I can't imagine any reason why you wouldn't) why does this change because you've been arbitrarily assigned "host" status?

For the simple reason that you decide the fate of the race for all the up to 15 others. Have you read the scrolling text on the player matching wait screen: "the host is responsible for the completion of the race"? While it's arguably unsportsmanlike for non-hosts to quit the race prematurely, at least they're not ramming everyone else from behind, figuratively speaking.

 

[CoccoBill]

So, if you are in third place you are going to see a guy in 10th bash the guy in 9th? No, we do not watch every car in the race, just the ones in our immediate vicinity.

I'm talking about events that you do see, not telepathy. Thank you for pointing that out Captain Obvious.

 

[helseth]

...I find it incredible that someone thinks that punishing everyone for one person's actions is justifiable. If this catches on, next thing we know someone will be invading a country just to hunt down one man.

One word: IRAQ

 

[FoolKiller]

I'm talking about events that you do see, not telepathy. Thank you for pointing that out Captain Obvious.

But what Soullessvessel was trying to say is that he doubts he would see it happen because he can only see what's around him. I was just clarifying his point for you.



And watch the double posting or a mod will get after you.

 

[nobuffalo]

Especially since you are arguing with one.

This thread is pointless, it's nothing but an ongoing debate of what people think is right and wrong, and no one is changing their minds on the matter. The only reason it isn't closed is because the mods are in on the debate. Like CoccoBill said, the game clearly states that the host is responsible for the completion of the race, thats it. Those are the rules. And whether there are rammers or not, quiting the race when you are the host is simply breaking the rules.

 

[Stonemonkey]

There's been a lot of criticism about both what goes on in the races and how the races are organised (from myself included) and there's been comments on how the online racing should be done like some other games which I'm sure PD could quite easily have done. After thinking about this and the fact that it's basically a demo atm I would think that PD is getting quite a bit of data and feedback by mixing up the racing the way they have and that it might all be deliberate. If they manage to come up with a collision detection/penalty system and performance points system that works with the terrible mixed up online race set up we have currently then it's going to work well in other online modes too.

So perhaps we're all just guinea pigs under those crash helmets for now. Or maybe I'm just talkin' out my ***.

 

[Denur]

So perhaps we're all just guinea pigs under those crash helmets for now. Or maybe I'm just talkin' out my ***.

No, you're not. It's been said on this forum on numerous occasions.

 

[FoolKiller]

I think one thing some people should do is read point 7 in the online user agreement (At least in the SCEA version).

It specifically states that you will not disrupt online activity.

So, while I am kind of on the fence about the host quitting issue I think this may be making a point here.

Bashing = disrupting online activity.
Quitting as host = disrupting online activity.


So, those who are quitting the race to stop bashers, whether you feel you are in the right or not, may want to take that into consideration. If Sony decides to enforce this rule your actions could count against you, no matter your reasoning.

I look at it like this: If a GTP member violates the AUP and then another member violates it as well in an attempt to stop the first member do they get excused?

I am not trying to debate the justification in quitting, but just pointing out that you may be violating the user agreement that you agree to every time you sign on.

 

[Stonemonkey]

No, you're not. It's been said on this forum on numerous occasions.

OK, so put up with the behaviour in the races, drive fairly, let the bashers bash and give PD the range of behaviour that's typical of online gaming so they can sort it all out for the full game.

 

[Famine]

Why do you think the other players can't decide for themselves whether they want to continue in the the event that someone starts ramming people? Why do you think you know better than them what irritates them and what they think the fair course of action is?

You're going to have to explain both what you mean and why you've chosen to answer my questions with questions.

As far as I'm concerned, no driver should be forced to endure a race that is not clean or fair if they do not want to. Even if that driver happens to have been arbitrarily assigned the task of being host.

It's a weakness of GT5P's online mode that the position is assigned to someone without any positive control.

For the simple reason that you decide the fate of the race for all the up to 15 others. Have you read the scrolling text on the player matching wait screen: "the host is responsible for the completion of the race"? While it's arguably unsportsmanlike for non-hosts to quit the race prematurely, at least they're not ramming everyone else from behind, figuratively speaking.

Anyone who quits a race decides on the fate of the race for the up to 15 others.

Say the guy in last place quits. Now the guys battling for first and second don't have to negotiate him while lapping him, affecting the outcome of the race. Say the guy in 4th quits. Now the guys in 5th-16th are 4th-15th and get more prize money.


Unless hosting is voluntary (or PD can implement host migration to solve this issue completely), I won't condemn any driver who quits for the reasons of being smacked into by the bashing kiddies, even if they happen to be the arbitrarily-assigned host. Drivers who quite because they are losing, however, are just jessies.

 

[GTP_JASE72]

You're going to have to explain both what you mean and why you've chosen to answer my questions with questions.

As far as I'm concerned, no driver should be forced to endure a race that is not clean or fair if they do not want to. Even if that driver happens to have been arbitrarily assigned the task of being host.

It's a weakness of GT5P's online mode that the position is assigned to someone without any positive control.



Anyone who quits a race decides on the fate of the race for the up to 15 others.

Say the guy in last place quits. Now the guys battling for first and second don't have to negotiate him while lapping him, affecting the outcome of the race. Say the guy in 4th quits. Now the guys in 5th-16th are 4th-15th and get more prize money.


Unless hosting is voluntary (or PD can implement host migration to solve this issue completely), I won't condemn any driver who quits for the reasons of being smacked into by the bashing kiddies, even if they happen to be the arbitrarily-assigned host. Drivers who quite because they are losing, however, are just jessies.

I used to do this all the time when playing the Jpn version.
Thinking :idea:use you own bandwidth to act the proverbial. Not mine.
But with everything being in Japanese I never knew if I was host or not.
I spent many a night searching for clean races/racers. You know when you've found them because no one quits. You just get damn good,clean,close racing.

 

[Denur]

OK, so put up with the behaviour in the races, drive fairly, let the bashers bash and give PD the range of behaviour that's typical of online gaming so they can sort it all out for the full game.

Not just the full game. PD brings-out updates to GT5p while developing the final GT5 game. I would expect that online racing is high on their development schedule and important online improvements should be available within the next 3 to 5 months (I hope). So we can beta-test those also...

 

[CoccoBill]

You're going to have to explain both what you mean and why you've chosen to answer my questions with questions.

As far as I'm concerned, no driver should be forced to endure a race that is not clean or fair if they do not want to. Even if that driver happens to have been arbitrarily assigned the task of being host.

It's a weakness of GT5P's online mode that the position is assigned to someone without any positive control.

Could you please elaborate a bit on the "forced to endure" bit? Since it genuinely seems you don't understand, I'll try to explain in more detail.

I'm fairly certain that other players on the track are perfectly capable of deciding for themselves whether they want the race to continue, and if they decide it shouldn't, they can just quit. Those who want to quit do so and the race carries on. If everyone thinks the race is ruined, everyone quits and the race ends. If on the other hand the host decides to quit, no one can choose for themselves and the race is ended whether anyone wanted or not. Do you understand? Read the SCEA's user agreement as FoolKiller pointed out.

Anyone who quits a race decides on the fate of the race for the up to 15 others.

Say the guy in last place quits. Now the guys battling for first and second don't have to negotiate him while lapping him, affecting the outcome of the race. Say the guy in 4th quits. Now the guys in 5th-16th are 4th-15th and get more prize money.

Which do you think is worse, getting kicked out of a race midgame for no reason or getting more credits at the end of the race?

Although you're wrong again, from the Spec II Update Information:

"Online play
- The award of race credits are now allocated at a fixed rate regardless of the number of race participants."

Surely you must understand you're wrong, be man enough to admit it.

Unless hosting is voluntary (or PD can implement host migration to solve this issue completely), I won't condemn any driver who quits for the reasons of being smacked into by the bashing kiddies, even if they happen to be the arbitrarily-assigned host. Drivers who quite because they are losing, however, are just jessies.

I agree, I hope PD addresses this glaring issue, where one kiddie can ruin the game for everyone if they happen to be the arbitrarily-assigned host.

 

[Famine]

Could you please elaborate a bit on the "forced to endure" bit? Since it genuinely seems you don't understand, I'll try to explain in more detail.

I'm fairly certain that other players on the track are perfectly capable of deciding for themselves whether they want the race to continue, and if they decide it shouldn't, they can just quit. Those who want to quit do so and the race carries on. If everyone thinks the race is ruined, everyone quits and the race ends. If on the other hand the host decides to quit, no one can choose for themselves and the race is ended whether anyone wanted or not. Do you understand? Read the SCEA's user agreement as FoolKiller pointed out.

Nnnkay. Now take the attitude and condescension away and reread the first post of mine you responded to.

If you actually take the time to answer the two questions I posed, rather than following them up with questions of your own, you'll see that everything you posted from "I'm" to "ends" is exactly what I asked.

Which do you think is worse, getting kicked out of a race midgame for no reason or getting more credits at the end of the race?

I'd rather not profit through cheaters, thanks.

Although you're wrong again, from the Spec II Update Information:

"Online play
- The award of race credits are now allocated at a fixed rate regardless of the number of race participants."

Surely you must understand you're wrong, be man enough to admit it.

Oooooookay. I'm not wholly sure where the "again" part is coming from, but I'll add that I've not played online since the update to Spec II so was unaware of the new credit allocation.


Now it's your turn. Read the two questions I asked. Answer them directly. Try doing it in a post that isn't dripping in condescension.

 

[BB-ANDY-]

it is soo annoying, when im in first, miles ahead of everyone else, last lap i get a "you have been dissconnected from the server". Its happened to me 3 or 4 times today.

 

[CoccoBill]

I'd rather not profit through cheaters, thanks.

So you'd rather lose all of the credits through cheaters. Ok, you have a right to an opinion of course but again, quitting as host you're making that decision for everyone, depriving them of this "right".

Now it's your turn. Read the two questions I asked. Answer them directly. Try doing it in a post that isn't dripping in condescension.

I assume you mean these:

1. Would you further agree that they should not be forced into wasting their bandwidth in a race that isn't clean/fair if they don't want to?

2. Assuming you do (because I can't imagine any reason why you wouldn't) why does this change because you've been arbitrarily assigned "host" status?

1. Other players can decide for themselves whether they want to continue in the the event that someone starts ramming people. You (the host) don't know better than them what irritates them and what they think the fair course of action is.

2. For the simple reason that you decide the fate of the race for all the up to 15 others. Read the scrolling text on the player matching wait screen: "the host is responsible for the completion of the race"? While it's arguably unsportsmanlike for non-hosts to quit the race prematurely, at least they're not ramming everyone else from behind, figuratively speaking.

As for your last request, I tried but failed. Let's just give it a rest, you clearly are not going to change your views. Someday, we'll look back on this, laugh nervously and change the subject.

 

[Famine]

Okay, I think you're labouring under a couple of misapprehensions. I'll clear those up right now.

1. I have never hosted a race.
2. I have never quit any form of online game.

Now those are clear, I'll add that I'm talking about other people quitting races.

So you'd rather lose all of the credits through cheaters.

I'd rather win things on my own merits than profit through the underhand methods of others.

1. Other players can decide for themselves whether they want to continue in the the event that someone starts ramming people. You (the host) don't know better than them what irritates them and what they think the fair course of action is.

The question is whether ANY player should be forced to continue racing in a race they don't consider to be fair or clean.

If you are of the opinion that a player may quit a race they don't consider to be fair or clean, rather than because they aren't winning, then we have the same opinion. Fair?

2. For the simple reason that you decide the fate of the race for all the up to 15 others.

As does any player quitting the race, as I said earlier.

Since I haven't played since the recent update, I'd like to ask... Does 3rd get more prize money than 4th? If 3rd quits before the end, promoting the 4th place driver to 3rd, does the new 3rd place driver get as much as the old 3rd place driver would have done, and more than he would have in 4th?

As for your last request, I tried but failed.

Up to here, you were doing fine. Your next line was a bit crappy, but otherwise it was a much better effort.


As I said at the beginning, I am of the opinion that any driver should expect a clean and fair race - like you see on TV (except BTCC, obviously) - and that if they don't get that they should be permitted to quit without censure. Since there is no direct control of who is host, this includes the host and I will not condemn any driver, host or otherwise, who quits an unfair race.

When PD implements either a system where a person can choose to host a race - permitting someone to voluntarily assume the mantle of responsibility placed upon them - or host migration, these issues will melt away. But until then, I'm happy for anyone to drop out of a waste of their bandwidth.


People who quit because they're losing/not winning are, however, buttmunches.

 

[Tired Tyres]

it is soo annoying, when im in first, miles ahead of everyone else, last lap i get a "you have been dissconnected from the server". Its happened to me 3 or 4 times today.

That happens to me 4-5 times a session!

 

[Soullessvessel]

ou doubt you'd see it? Why, you don't pay attention to other cars on the track? Kind of like how you don't pay attention to other players who want to race?

point was proven with the 3rd 10th place comment bur honestly not really i dont im an exprenced Forza drifter i tandum with people alot and ive been in many drift battled, perfect example is I had a tournament a few weeks ago a judge questioned if what he thought i was attempting was accually what i trying to do, and all i could say to him is I dont know, when im running competitively i get somewhat of a tunnel vision where i dont notice whats doing on i just adapt to it, yet when tanduming with a skilled driver when following i can still get door to door with them, now drift battle runs take no more then a minute usually, yet i couldnt recall what my opponet, or what I did during that run, and i still dont to this day, but that doesnt mean im not aware of me and them, im just not actively thinking about it and im falling back on insticts

 

[CoccoBill]

The question is whether ANY player should be forced to continue racing in a race they don't consider to be fair or clean.

If you are of the opinion that a player may quit a race they don't consider to be fair or clean, rather than because they aren't winning, then we have the same opinion. Fair?

As does any player quitting the race, as I said earlier.

We have the exact same opinion, yes, when talking about a game where the host quitting doesn't end the race for everyone. It is not the same to quit and let everyone continue as if you never were there, and to quit and end the race for everyone. If you don't see the difference, I think you're maybe being a bit selfish. SCEA user agreement supports my view, as arguably does common sense.

Since I haven't played since the recent update, I'd like to ask... Does 3rd get more prize money than 4th? If 3rd quits before the end, promoting the 4th place driver to 3rd, does the new 3rd place driver get as much as the old 3rd place driver would have done, and more than he would have in 4th?

This I can't say for certain, I do not know. I'd assume he'd get paid for 3rd.

Up to here, you were doing fine. Your next line was a bit crappy, but otherwise it was a much better effort.

Thank you, however, you might want to compare my answers to the ones I originally gave you, the ones you neglected and demanded proper ones.

People who quit because they're losing/not winning are, however, buttmunches.

...especially if they're the host.

 

[Famine]

We have the exact same opinion, yes, when talking about a game where the host quitting doesn't end the race for everyone. It is not the same to quit and let everyone continue as if you never were there, and to quit and end the race for everyone. If you don't see the difference, I think you're maybe being a bit selfish. SCEA user agreement supports my view, as arguably does common sense.

Noting the two facts I stated, why am I being selfish?

Thing is, right now you have a field of 16 drivers. All 16 drivers are people and have bandwidth. If any of them gets sick of an unfair race they shouldn't have to waste their time/bandwidth on it.

Now, bam, PD make one of them the host without them having any say in it. Suddenly they stop being people with bandwidth and now have to stick out whatever crap gets thrown at them?


Negative - and I will not criticise them.

This I can't say for certain, I do not know. I'd assume he'd get paid for 3rd.

Right...

Earlier on I said that if 4th quits mid-race, the guys in 5th-16th are 4th-15th and get more prize money. You told me I was wrong and should man up and admit it... But now you say you aren't sure if they get the increased prize money according to their finishing positions, but assume they would?

Thank you, however, you might want to compare my answers to the ones I originally gave you, the ones you neglected and demanded proper ones.

I did. Your questions didn't answer mine - even if they hadn't been phrased as questions. The question was whether any individual driver should expect a clean/fair race and be given the freedom to bail if they didn't get one. Your response was "Why do you think you know better than them what irritates them and what they think the fair course of action is?"

This didn't meet the scope of the question. You were asking why I had the right to decide what happened to the individual drivers, when I was talking of the right of the individual driver to decide what happens.

...especially if they're the host.

Anyone who quits a race because they're losing or not winning.


Until the host is someone who has elected to do it (or no-one person is responsible for it), host status doesn't matter to me. It's foisted upon someone who, until that moment, is just another driver.

 

[CoccoBill]

Noting the two facts I stated, why am I being selfish?

Thing is, right now you have a field of 16 drivers. All 16 drivers are people and have bandwidth. If any of them gets sick of an unfair race they shouldn't have to waste their time/bandwidth on it.

Now, bam, PD make one of them the host without them having any say in it. Suddenly they stop being people with bandwidth and now have to stick out whatever crap gets thrown at them?

Negative - and I will not criticise them.

You're being selfish since you're only concerned about your own game, and choose to do what suits you best even when it affects up to 15 others. If you have a better word for that than selfish, I'd like to hear it.

Right...

Earlier on I said that if 4th quits mid-race, the guys in 5th-16th are 4th-15th and get more prize money. You told me I was wrong and should man up and admit it... But now you say you aren't sure if they get the increased prize money according to their finishing positions, but assume they would?

I meant you were wrong about your justifications for quitting, credits are of no consequence to me compared to being kicked off a race for no reason, as I've stated a couple times already.

I did. Your questions didn't answer mine - even if they hadn't been phrased as questions. The question was whether any individual driver should expect a clean/fair race and be given the freedom to bail if they didn't get one. Your response was "Why do you think you know better than them what irritates them and what they think the fair course of action is?"

This didn't meet the scope of the question. You were asking why I had the right to decide what happened to the individual drivers, when I was talking of the right of the individual driver to decide what happens.

In the world of GT5P online, as it stands, all men are not created equal. With great power comes great responsibility. If you're the host, you're responsible for the completion of the race. You may not like it but that's how it is. If you're a quitter, feel free to do so unless you're screwing the game up for 15 other players who paid for the game in the process.

Until the host is someone who has elected to do it (or no-one person is responsible for it), host status doesn't matter to me. It's foisted upon someone who, until that moment, is just another driver.

Quite obviously you feel your (=the host's) right to have a clean race is greater than everyone else's. I disagree. Anyway, that's how the game is now and it's not the non-host players' fault, why should they suffer because of the host? May I add, I have a 100/10mbit connection and I've yet to race online and NOT be the host.

 

[GTP_JASE72]

You two are getting to be like a married couple.
Any minute now one of you is going to storm off.

I know a good guidance counsellor if you need one

 

[Famine]

You're being selfish since you're only concerned about your own game, and choose to do what suits you best even when it affects up to 15 others.

1. I have never hosted a race.
2. I have never quit any form of online game.

I'm defending the right of any driver to quit a race they feel to be unfair.

If you have a better word for that than selfish, I'd like to hear it.

Certainly doesn't fit the bill.

I meant you were wrong about your justifications for quitting,

1. I have never hosted a race.
2. I have never quit any form of online game.

Quite obviously you feel your (=the host's) right to have a clean race is greater than everyone else's. I disagree.

Quite obviously you feel that the host's right to have a clean race is lesser than everyone else's. I disagree. Everyone is equal in that respect.

 

[Factory Driver]

I haven't read all 15 pages of this thread, but it seems to me like a good solution for quitters is to have the AI take over the quitter's car until the conclusion of the race.

 

[Dave A]

If the host had a choice of being the host or not I would agree, it would be selfish for him/her to quit. As it stands the host is chosen as the host without any consent or promt, in effect you are chosen as the host unwillingly. There's 1001 reasons why you might quit a race, simply being bored of the race being one of them, another might be the phone rings, the doorbell rings. The race lasts longer than expected. The fact that the host has not chosen to be the host changes the scope of whats fair and reasonalbe and what isn't compared to if the host was elected or when private lobbies come the user who created the lobby.

Sure I would agree that there's a gentlemanly etiquette to being a host willing or not such as not quitting if you arn't winning and if the race i nearing the end and you have to go it would be polite to see the race off if you can, but being the host unwillingly does not suddenly mean that failure to do so is almost a crime. It is PD's job to sort the system out so that the host quitting doesn't have such a detrimental effect to the online play, not the users job to work around it.

 

[TTownEP]

This is a stupid thread. After slogging through the first 5 or so pages, I came to the conclusion that there is no black and white here. The motives for quitting, and even identifying the host is so grey, no one makes sense anymore. Let's just run with the idea that Prologue is basically a polished beta, and we are all testing it. I'm sure PD can see the problems. I'm sure they have all been booted from a race at one point. I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume this annoys them too. Wait for GT5. Kaz doesn't put out trash.

 

[Earth]

I'm guessing that today alone quitters have cost me 500,000 credits.

Why not park somewhere and wait 2-3 minutes for the race to end and pick up 35,000 credits for finishing 4th?

 

[Metalteeth9]

This is a stupid thread. After slogging through the first 5 or so pages, I came to the conclusion that there is no black and white here. The motives for quitting, and even identifying the host is so grey, no one makes sense anymore. Let's just run with the idea that Prologue is basically a polished beta, and we are all testing it. I'm sure PD can see the problems. I'm sure they have all been booted from a race at one point. I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume this annoys them too. Wait for GT5. Kaz doesn't put out trash.

You win this thread.