The problem with ignoring "unintentional" laggers.

[DustyPorViva]

Originally Posted by cbk1994

Not when the other player pays (paid?) just as much as you for the right to play.

"Oh no, I paid for an online game that requires a decent internet connection and am shocked because suddenly me paying for an online game and knowing my connection sucks bit me in the ass? Maybe I should have thought twice about online gaming with my crappy internet."

Originally Posted by Chakrah

Let's say it's the 1950s..
You're all playing basketball right, being white (non laggers)..and I want to play basketball but I can't because im a lagger(Black).

You won't let me play because I'm a different.

same concept

Seriously? You're making that comparison?

[cbk1994]

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

"Oh no, I paid for an online game that requires a decent internet connection and am shocked because suddenly me paying for an online game and knowing my connection sucks bit me in the ass? Maybe I should have thought twice about online gaming with my crappy internet."

lol?

because it's totally ok to decide one day you're no longer going to allow players with high pings to participate in the game

[DustyPorViva]

Originally Posted by cbk1994

lol?

because it's totally ok to decide one day you're no longer going to allow players with high pings to participate in the game

Sure, the requirements aren't written on paper like say, a PC game is. But if I buy a PC game that says I meet the minimal requirements, but not the recommended requirements... I'm not going to be shocked when I'm missing out on some of the game. Just because I paid for it doesn't mean I'm entitled to experience it when I lack what is recommended.

Participating in online gaming means you're putting yourself in that situation whether it's written down or not. I've downloaded plenty of games and realized I just couldn't enjoy it with my internet connection, even though I met the minimal requirements. Now this becomes especially bad when it goes from tarnishing your personal enjoyment, to messing it up for everyone else that has to play with you.

Really, all I hear is "stop whining, stop being butthurt"... sounds like who's really butthurt is the minority that this is going to affect. Why don't you deal with the fact that you're actually going to have to deal with having a ****ty internet connection instead of everyone else that has the displeasure of participating in events with you.

[cbk1994]

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

Sure, the requirements aren't written on paper like say, a PC game is. But if I buy a PC game that says I meet the minimal requirements, but not the recommended requirements... I'm not going to be shocked when I'm missing out on some of the game. Just because I paid for it doesn't mean I'm entitled to experience it when I lack what is recommended.

Participating in online gaming means you're putting yourself in that situation whether it's written down or not. I've downloaded plenty of games and realized I just couldn't enjoy it with my internet connection, even though I met the minimal requirements. Now this becomes especially bad when it goes from tarnishing your personal enjoyment, to messing it up for everyone else that has to play with you.

I'm not saying be unreasonable -- if someone is warping all over the place, go ahead and kick them. Arbitrary limits on ping, like the OP seems to be suggesting, are just unfair. If it's that much of a problem, use serverside hit detection.

Really, all I hear is "stop whining, stop being butthurt"... sounds like who's really butthurt is the minority that this is going to affect. Why don't you deal with the fact that you're actually going to have to deal with having a ****ty internet connection instead of everyone else that has the displeasure of participating in events with you.

My ping right now on UN is 29 MS.

[Cloven]

Definitely support a cap, and the cap should take averages into consideration in case (as was already stated) spikes occasionally happen. Over all this is likely the fairest method and will support the largest majority possible.

I feel for those people who are unable (for whatever reason) to obtain faster and/or more reliable internet service, however the greater majority should not be forced to suffer because of it. There is just no logic to be found in presuming otherwise in my opinion.

[cbk1994]

Originally Posted by Cloven

Definitely support a cap, and the cap should take averages into consideration in case (as was already stated) spikes occasionally happen. Over all this is likely the fairest method and will support the largest majority possible.

I feel for those people who are unable (for whatever reason) to obtain faster and/or more reliable internet service, however the greater majority should not be forced to suffer because of it. There is just no logic to be found in presuming otherwise in my opinion.

You're not considering other options, such as serverside hit detection.

[DustyPorViva]

Originally Posted by cbk1994

You're not considering other options, such as serverside hit detection.

Ya, let's move Unholy Nation over to serverside hit detection. That'll go well... are you even listening to what you're saying?

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by cbk1994

You're not considering other options, such as serverside hit detection.

Not one single person on the server would want this.

[Cloven]

Originally Posted by cbk1994

You're not considering other options, such as serverside hit detection.

Produce a quality method for doing this, test it, take a preference poll. If the poll substantially agrees with you then I'd have real reason to consider it. Otherwise I don't see how putting the cart before the horse is a practical option at this time.

[weeway]

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

"Oh no, I paid for an online game that requires a decent internet connection and am shocked because suddenly me paying for an online game and knowing my connection sucks bit me in the ass? Maybe I should have thought twice about online gaming with my crappy internet."

Thats extreamly unfair.
Some people cant help lagging and people cant afford better internet.
it's not their fault there ISP sucks.
Just because they have bad internet dosent mean they should just be banned form playing games online.

[DustyPorViva]

Originally Posted by weeway

Thats extreamly unfair.
Some people cant help lagging and people cant afford better internet.
it's not their fault there ISP sucks.
Just because they have bad internet dosent mean they should just be banned form playing games online.

So just because people can't afford new computers or help it, they should be able to play modern games? It just doesn't work that way in the computing world. The reality is that people who have ****ty internet tend to NOT be able to enjoy online games. I can't play my xbox 360 online half the time because my internet just isn't up to it.

You know what games like Call of Duty do when I lag? They FRAME STUTTER. This makes it impossible for me to aim, which means I should just quit. Oh well... should I sue Activision because I paid for the game? Not really. It sucks, but just like I can't help it, I shouldn't expect others to have to deal with my misfortune as well. I've also had to stop playing another MMO I was playing because my internet was disrupting my ability to enjoy it. Sure, they don't ban me from the game, but I acknowledge that even if I have an internet connection, that doesn't mean I qualify to play all online games, or that others should be forced to let me.

I have a very unstable connection. I get disconnected a lot. Know what happens when I get disconnected for even a second during an event? I get booted upon reconnecting. Damn, they're discriminating against my unstable internet.