• 54 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by Blu3V3nom07 (4233 posts) -

.. Like the previous system, the new reputation system relies quite a bit on player feedback to determine which category an online gamer falls into — "Good Player", "Needs Improvement" or "Avoid Me." What's different here is the definition of player feedback.

It's not just about simply leaving a rating. Now if you mute another player, it will affect their reputation. If you ban another player from your server for misbehaving, it affects their reputation. And if you decide you don't like another player and urge the entirety of your newly-expanded friends list to complain about them? Well, that's where the safeguards come into play. ..

It's not just about collecting data, but how the system uses and weighs the data collected. If a dozen people suddenly report a single user, the system looks at a variety of factors before laying the smackdown. Did each of those players actually play in an online game with the person they reported? If not, all of their complaints won't equal that of a single person who spent 15 minutes playing Call of Duty online with the reported party. The system also looks at the reputation of both the person reporting and the alleged offender, the frequency of reports from a single user — it's a system the team plans on tweaking constantly for balance and fairness, but it sounds like they're off to a stellar start.

Kotaku: Xbox One's Reputation System Sounds Crazy But It Just Might Work

Major Nelson: Xbox One Smart Match

I always thought the 360's "Pro, Recreation" options of who you want to game with were pretty ineffective. Killzone and Destiny are probably gonna be the first to determine the general PS4 users' behavior consensus. I'm not so sure if Sony is going be implementing similar evolved systems to regulate users uhm, shit-talking profiles.

Online
#2 Posted by AgnosticJesus (544 posts) -

I'm not liking the idea of the new reputation system relying on user reviews like the current system. Hopefully there are other things that factor into a player's reputation. Currently on Live I have 75% of players avoiding me for cussing and trash talk even though I never use a mic outside of being in private parties with friends. Nothing I've read makes me believe that the new system will be any different with immature idiots down voting other peoples reps because they got beat in a game.

#3 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

This sounds like it could be a good feature. It may be possible to complain about the nitty-grity, but the idea of it sounds nice.

#4 Edited by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

The entire 360 rep system is busted because people use it when they are upset or on a losing streak and someone kills them multiple times.

If they want it to work they will need to start a clean slate when the X1 is released.

#5 Posted by DarthOrange (3866 posts) -

I feel the whole reputation system is dumb. If their is a grief option to report the real assholes then does anything else really matter?

Also wtf?


It's not just about simply leaving a rating. Now if you mute another player, it will affect their reputation. If you ban another player from your server for misbehaving, it affects their reputation.

Seems like it would be pretty easy to get a death bad reputation by a thousand cuts. What if you play without a mic and you just mute everyone? Then you are negatively affecting some poor bastards who did no wrong? Or if you kick someone out of your server to make room for a friend, you are fucking with someone who once again did nothing wrong?

#6 Posted by connerthekewlkid (1844 posts) -

The entire 360 rep system is busted because people use it when they are upset or on a losing streak and someone kills them multiple times.

If they want it to work they will need to start a clean slate when the X1 is released.

But really does anybody care about their rep on the 360?

#7 Posted by kindgineer (2767 posts) -

I almost always mute people that talk when I am playing in multiplayer. I don't do this because they are being obnoxious, although sometimes they are, but instead because where my console is requires relative silence. If I'm affecting someones overall reputation simply because of that, there better be an option to opt out of voice audio overall.

#8 Posted by spraynardtatum (3230 posts) -

So does that mean if I muted all the players in a game that everyone would get bad reputation? People that mute everyone in the game are going to be the new "that guy".

Online
#9 Edited by BigJeffrey (5074 posts) -

tweaking constantly for balance and fairness

Seems like they will tweak it to be fair, so i guess they will realize that people Mute other people often just because.

#10 Posted by TooWalrus (13235 posts) -

It's going to be weird. Personally, I don't like hearing voices coming through the TV, I found it easier to focus on game audio and team communication when wearing a headset, which Kinect will eliminate (though I'm sure headsets will still be a viable option). Hopefully they tweak the settings so that I don't need to immediately mute anyone I don't feel like hearing, as I often do.

Online
#11 Posted by deadsheepinwoods (14 posts) -

Please think logically about this, people. Muting someone once in a while obviously wouldn't affect their reputation, because people mute others all the time for multiple reasons. As was explained, it's a complicated system and it's not as simple and stupid as half of you are trying to make it sound.

It takes multiple things into account, and it will reflect in their reputation. It's a nice little feature that some people will find use in, but most people will disregard. It's good news to hear that they are upgrading from the current reputation system.

#12 Posted by schreiberty (208 posts) -

As long as they do something better than the current system ill be fine. I just looked at my rep for the first time and it says that 73% of people avoided me, all for "behavior" related reasons and none for "communications". I play call of duty semi regularly and must have played with thousands, if not tens of thousands of people and i cant believe that 73% percent of them submited a negative player review.

Also i have 5 stars under rep so i have no idea how any of this data is calculated.

#13 Edited by EchoEcho (830 posts) -

I foresee this working about as well as the system on the 360 -- as in, not at all.

People will rate their friends up, and completely ignore everyone else. Who seriously takes time to rate random people up? I've almost never seen anyone with less than a 5-star rep on Xbox Live, even when they're behaving like complete assholes, so clearly most people don't bother to rate down those who deserve it, either.

The only negative rep I've gotten on my account is for shit I've never even done, such as using foul language (I only use a mic in party chat) or for cheating, which tells me that most people that are rating others down are doing it because they're angry about getting killed in a game and abusing the reputation system as an outlet.

If they add in bullshit like:

a.) getting lower rep when someone goes through and systematically mutes everyone just by force of habit, or

b.) getting lower rep when an admin kicks you from their server for having a higher score than them, or to make room for their friends

then this system is not only going to not work, it's going to actively hurt the people who just mind their own business and don't do anything wrong.

You can't rely on the general userbase to use these systems as intended. Many will abuse it, many will ignore it entirely, and the few people who try to use it appropriately aren't going to make a dent. So short of having completely impartial moderators sitting in on every non-private gaming session to dish out judgment where appropriate -- which would just be ridiculous -- I don't see the point.

#14 Posted by pweidman (2342 posts) -

Muting counting against a players rep, if true, is just plain dumb. It should only matter if someone blocks communication and/or straight away reports a player as someone they never wanna play w/again(that's one current 360 feature that is great imo), and even then it should have a frequency/amount barrier to be able to affect rep.

#15 Edited by spraynardtatum (3230 posts) -

@deadsheepinwoods said:

Please think logically about this, people. Muting someone once in a while obviously wouldn't affect their reputation, because people mute others all the time for multiple reasons. As was explained, it's a complicated system and it's not as simple and stupid as half of you are trying to make it sound.

It takes multiple things into account, and it will reflect in their reputation. It's a nice little feature that some people will find use in, but most people will disregard. It's good news to hear that they are upgrading from the current reputation system.

I'm sure it is very complicated and has all sorts of cool data that it's going to be using from our profiles but to me it sounds like the Scarlett Letter. First it was 1984. Microsoft is working its way through classic literature with all their new features.

Online
#16 Posted by deadsheepinwoods (14 posts) -

@schreiberty: It's not 73% of the people you have played with that reviewed you. It would be ridiculous to assume that 10,000 people have actually taken their time to give you a rating.

It is 73% of the people that have rated you that gave you poor ratings. For all you know, there could be like 11 people that rated you and were upset. I mean honestly, what is the likelihood that someone gives you a good rating after playing with you over someone who gives you a bad rating after playing with you?

My bet is that it is just people who were upset after a loss, unless you are actually an annoying person to play games with :)

#17 Posted by big_jon (5743 posts) -

I'm going to get banned for being good at BF4 in other words...

#18 Posted by ajamafalous (12030 posts) -

Pretty shitty system. I have a >50% 'bad' rating on my 360 gamertag, all for things I've literally never done (leaving a match early, communication abuse, etc.). I've played multiplayer on my 360 for a grand total of like two weeks of Halo 3 a year after it came out, all of which I never even used a mic or left early or talked shit or anything (obviously). Seems like a really stupid way to allow innocent people to be griefed.

#19 Posted by EXTomar (4840 posts) -

Online reputation systems need to be based on promotion not demotion. Of course it needs a "Report" function to block really toxic stuff that would make Nazi ghosts blush but otherwise...

- Everyone starts "muted"

- Promote people you know

- Promote people you like

The idea that anyone out there can be fair or trusted with moderating a system based on a 10 minute match is crazy. On the other hand you know who and what you want to communicate with.

#20 Posted by Shaunage (715 posts) -

A lot of the time I mute everyone else in a game right at the start, whether they have a mic or not. I don't think that should affect them.

#21 Posted by schreiberty (208 posts) -

@deadsheepinwoods: But on the positive side it says that 27% of people either left a good review or no review, so is that just a lie?

Also does this even matter? does rep even affect anything?

#22 Edited by TheSouthernDandy (3903 posts) -

Internet - "People on Xbox live suck Microsoft needs to do something about this!"

Microsoft - "Hey guys we're gonna try to do something about this"

Internet - "Let's crap on this before we know if it works, you guys suck!"

Also I'm pretty sure that somebody muting you twice isn't gonna get you banned. Cmon guys.

#23 Posted by deadsheepinwoods (14 posts) -

@schreiberty: It literally doesn't affect anything at all, so don't worry too much about it! And I'm not sure exactly how it works, but I know that when it shows you percentages, it is usually a percentage of the people that actually took the time to rate you.

#24 Edited by MikkaQ (10317 posts) -

I'm glad I'm not the only one who just mutes everyone in an online match.

#25 Posted by Andorski (5342 posts) -

I hope MS finds value is banning people on XBL merely for being a douche. Policing their community with a heavily used ban hammer would make their entire online infrastructure worth the monthly fee.

#26 Edited by Akyho (1677 posts) -

Playing Xbl for years and going in to look at my current Rep it reads something like this.

50% Bad Conduct. I remember when I got this....it was when I was playing alot of Lost planet MP and would be 1st 2nd or 3rd, while the rest of my team was at the back. I dont know why but it was at that time.

I have 25% aggressive behaviour, I know exactly the point this happened. I was playing Rainbow Six Vega 1, Shooting down a hall way that had the entire enemy team I said on voice "Suppressive fire! Everyone keep low!" What does a dude do? Runs straight in gets head shotted by me and then raged on comms...and yet I get aggressive behaviour.

I also got alot of "Disconnected early." I got this when playing DOA4 and Soul Calibur4. Id play some online and join a LOBBY and see a lvl 90 dude, he WILL kick my ass. So I decline and find someone more my level...THEY counted that as a early disconnect......WHEN I WASNT EVEN IN THE MATCH YET!

I have a few random set of things I would need to look at to remember why.

I know 90% wasnt true and just some dick who grieffed me.

#27 Posted by Eitje (3 posts) -

I really think this is a good feature of Microsoft to make it more attractive!

#28 Posted by Gruebacca (525 posts) -

I mute people on consoles not because they're assholes. I mute them because I want to play and talk with my friends without a poor-quality mic blowing signals on my ear. I don't think that should give them negative marks on their account just because I choose not to listen to them.

I mute people for many different reasons. You can't assume that muting a person implies only one certain thing.

#29 Posted by xyzygy (10028 posts) -

It's going to be weird. Personally, I don't like hearing voices coming through the TV, I found it easier to focus on game audio and team communication when wearing a headset, which Kinect will eliminate (though I'm sure headsets will still be a viable option). Hopefully they tweak the settings so that I don't need to immediately mute anyone I don't feel like hearing, as I often do.

But it sounds like with this system, they'll be able to look at your muting history too. So if you mute everyone you play with then it will see that you're not muting because they're annoying, it's because you want to game silently.

#30 Posted by TooWalrus (13235 posts) -

@xyzygy said:

@toowalrus said:

It's going to be weird. Personally, I don't like hearing voices coming through the TV, I found it easier to focus on game audio and team communication when wearing a headset, which Kinect will eliminate (though I'm sure headsets will still be a viable option). Hopefully they tweak the settings so that I don't need to immediately mute anyone I don't feel like hearing, as I often do.

But it sounds like with this system, they'll be able to look at your muting history too. So if you mute everyone you play with then it will see that you're not muting because they're annoying, it's because you want to game silently.

That doesn't mean the system wouldn't be better off with a phat button marked "mute all," or "disable player mics" or something.

...yay! Notifications are working!

Online
#31 Posted by WickedFather (1733 posts) -

What does it matter. Nobody will buy one.

#32 Posted by TyCobb (1972 posts) -

I never got the whole reputation thing with the 360. I have had XBL for almost the entirety of the 360's run somehow one day I was at like 2 stars. I only ever saw it stay at the default 3 until a couple of years ago. What is that even based on? Do people vote you up or down or does there have to be a bunch? The funny thing is that I am a respectable person when playing online so not sure how I would have even got a bad vote unless I just ended up pissing someone off.

#33 Edited by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

It looks like they updated some info about it.

Looks like if your a known cheater/jerk youll be put with others who do the same thing.

Source

Second source

Didnt Max Payne 3 do this with its online play? Like cheaters could still play but got stuff with other cheaters?

#34 Posted by GERALTITUDE (3428 posts) -

Well, this is a start.

#35 Posted by Itwastuesday (973 posts) -

This reminds me of the rating system currently in place on the Xbox 360 with the "Avoid this player" kind of nonsense that appeared to barely even work at all.

#36 Edited by cloudymusic (1158 posts) -

This makes me sort of nervous as someone who plays fighting games online. There are a ton of online players who will leave you bad reviews (based on whatever made-up reason they feel like) if you beat them and/or play in a way that they don't like. I have a huge amount of "unsportsmanlike"/"overly aggressive"/etc. reviews and I've never once cheated, disconnected, or done anything else that could possibly be construed as bad behavior. I just play grapplers and defensive characters, which online players generally hate.

Hopefully MS designs the system to account for that sort of thing, but I don't even know how you'd distinguish a legitimate review from an invalid one in that sort of situation.

#37 Edited by EXTomar (4840 posts) -

Again the issue is who is deciding who is griefer and who is good? Asking a griefer "Who is a griefer?" is a hilariously bad idea. An even worse idea is to ask a cheater "Who is a cheater?"

#38 Edited by Silver-Streak (1369 posts) -

If this is a "Everyone starts at red and works their way up to green" that's fine. If this is a "Everyone starts at green and gets demoted to red" then it's going to be abused as soon as someone loses to someone else more than once in a multiplayer game.

Edit: Removed nonsensical inflammatory remark.

#39 Posted by Demoskinos (15011 posts) -

@darthorange: My exact thoughts. I mute everyone out of habit when I play multiplayer games.

#40 Posted by hollitz (1556 posts) -

If I cared about playing with randos or competitive multiplayer, this would be pretty exciting news. Good on them.

#41 Posted by Jojojimmeny (60 posts) -

I just hope that this does in fact change the impact of receiving negative reputation from people who are just upset about not winning all the time.

I know I've gotten a few negative marks on my XBL gamercard because I wasn't as awesome at Gears of War 2 co-op as some 12-14 year old kid thought I should be, or because for once I actually won a round of Assassin's Creed 2 multiplayer and the person in second place wasn't able to kill me in the last 10 seconds to get that dumb achievement (and therefore began accusing me of cheating over voice chat). Experiences like that are why I don't play random multiplayer on Xbox 360 much at all, and that kind of makes me feel like I'm wasting money paying full price for any game that has a large multiplayer component to it.

#42 Edited by JouselDelka (966 posts) -

I don't play on Xbox but this sounds good and well thought-out, aside from the muting aspect.

I still hope the Xbone bombs.

#43 Posted by Bollard (5661 posts) -

As long as the rating can actually go down this time, that would be great.

It was always ridiculous how once you get to 5 stars no amount of negative feedback will lower it.

#44 Edited by Deranged (1837 posts) -

I honestly don't give a damn what I'm labelled as. I personally don't trash talk or insult others when I'm gaming but this reputation thing seems a little too... general. Some people prefer to game quietly or simply talk to a few friends via Xbox Live Party chat instead of hearing a bunch of arrogant buffoons spouting out nonsense every five seconds because they can't control their emotions.

#45 Edited by Capum15 (4925 posts) -

Huh. I just realized that I don't even know what my reputation is.

#46 Posted by crusader8463 (14423 posts) -

@akyho: For the little while I played my 360 online it was to play one of the wwe smackdown games. 09 iirc. And by playing that online it destroyed my rating because that game has a god awful terrible community of people online. I was playing that game like 10-15 hours a day as I got hooked on the CAW and online stuff and I will admit I was pretty fucking good at that game for a few months there and I was never getting beaten. Like maybe once out of every 20-30 matches kind of good. But because I was always winning the screaming, bile, moaning, and bitching that came on the mics was something I have never seen equal to again and after every match I saw that bad rep stuff get reported on me.

When I was playing there was a small group of people still active and I played with roughly the same hundred or so people as I saw the same names over and over. Time and time again they would start raging and reporting me because I beat them or stole their belt from them in some competition they would start and I would join in on. It was bad.

I doubt I will ever own an xbox one, or at least not anytime soon, but I'm always interested in seeing how companies are approaching this issue. Sadly dicks ruining online games is always a huge problem and is why I don't get to enjoy many online game anymore unless it's on my PC where I can find a dedicated server with active people who kick and ban the douches as they show up.

#47 Edited by SmilingPig (1340 posts) -

I would like an option on XBL that allow you to only play with a chosen age group.

#48 Posted by spraynardtatum (3230 posts) -

I can't wait for a piece of technology to judge me and base my experience off of that judgement.

Online
#49 Posted by themonkeyworks (71 posts) -

Well I personally welcome Xbox LIVE working to moderate the experience of its clients who are paying for this service. After years of playing call of duty and putting up with inconsiderate or bored players team killing, cornering, private chatting, blah blah blah. Its nice to know that they are working on a system that will enable players to avoid those scenarios. And just like any new system, it will take time to perfect.

#50 Posted by MoonwalkSA (435 posts) -

@extomar said:

Again the issue is who is deciding who is griefer and who is good? Asking a griefer "Who is a griefer?" is a hilariously bad idea. An even worse idea is to ask a cheater "Who is a cheater?"

And on top of that, it's an even worse idea to ask "who is a cheater?" to someone who is very bad and angry at a game, because their answer might just be whoever is killing them.