Difference between revisions of "Ragequitting"
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
=== Examples === | === Examples === | ||
| + | [[:Category:Online Games|Online Games]] such as [[League of Legends]], the [[Left 4 Dead series]], and the [[Counter-Strike series]] are well-known for producing [[Ragequitting]] since they all require team work under pressure. When teams do not manage to coordinate, agree, or succeed this may become extremely frustrating for players and make them want to quit. | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
[[So Long Sucker]] | [[So Long Sucker]] | ||
| Line 28: | Line 25: | ||
A perceived [[Predictable Winner]] or an identified [[Dominant Strategy]] is typically not enough to provoke [[Ragequitting]] since this might just be due to others playing well. [[Ragequitting]] depends on players feeling frustrated to the point where quitting regardless of consequences for other players gameplay experience becomes the least bad alternative. This is typically happens to players either on due their own performance when meeting [[Challenging Gameplay]] or the inability of succeeding with [[Cooperation]]. The latter cause makes [[Betrayal]] a potential reason for [[Ragequitting]], but only when players are not emotionally prepared for it. [[Pubstomping]] is a typical example of emergent feature that can be frustrating to experience since one is thrown into a disadvantageous gameplay situation with a strong possibility of being killed quickly and then have to experience the exact say thing directly again. | A perceived [[Predictable Winner]] or an identified [[Dominant Strategy]] is typically not enough to provoke [[Ragequitting]] since this might just be due to others playing well. [[Ragequitting]] depends on players feeling frustrated to the point where quitting regardless of consequences for other players gameplay experience becomes the least bad alternative. This is typically happens to players either on due their own performance when meeting [[Challenging Gameplay]] or the inability of succeeding with [[Cooperation]]. The latter cause makes [[Betrayal]] a potential reason for [[Ragequitting]], but only when players are not emotionally prepared for it. [[Pubstomping]] is a typical example of emergent feature that can be frustrating to experience since one is thrown into a disadvantageous gameplay situation with a strong possibility of being killed quickly and then have to experience the exact say thing directly again. | ||
| − | Designing for [[Spectacular Failure Enjoyment]] is a way to design against [[Ragequitting]] since the two experiences are mutually exclusive. [[Togetherness]] has a dual relationship with [[Ragequitting]]. First, people are less likely to ragequit if they are experiencing [[Togetherness]] with some of the other players since this typically would negatively affect these other players. Second, if [[Ragequitting]] does occur it will break [[Togetherness]] related to that player. | + | Designing for [[Spectacular Failure Enjoyment]] is a way to design against [[Ragequitting]] since the two experiences are mutually exclusive. While not directly countering the reasons for [[Ragequitting]], punishing people that do it by negatively adjusting them in [[Ranking Systems]] for this behavior can help players control their behavior. |
| + | [[Togetherness]] has a dual relationship with [[Ragequitting]]. First, people are less likely to ragequit if they are experiencing [[Togetherness]] with some of the other players since this typically would negatively affect these other players. Second, if [[Ragequitting]] does occur it will break [[Togetherness]] related to that player. | ||
== Consequences == | == Consequences == | ||
| − | The direct consequence of [[Ragequitting]] is of course that a player [[Surrendering|Surrenders]]. Since this was due to anger at what had happened during gameplay, [[Ragequitting]] is a good indicator that the quitting player had [[Emotional Engrossment]]. | + | The direct consequence of [[Ragequitting]] is of course that a player [[Surrendering|Surrenders]]. Since this was due to anger at what had happened during gameplay, [[Ragequitting]] is a good indicator that the quitting player had [[Emotional Engrossment]]. [[Scapegoats]] are created whenever a person blames other players for the problems that result in [[Ragequitting]]. |
== Relations == | == Relations == | ||
| Line 37: | Line 35: | ||
[[Cooperation]], | [[Cooperation]], | ||
[[Emotional Engrossment]], | [[Emotional Engrossment]], | ||
| + | [[Scapegoats]], | ||
[[Surrendering]] | [[Surrendering]] | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
=== Can Modulate === | === Can Modulate === | ||
| Line 50: | Line 47: | ||
=== Can Be Modulated By === | === Can Be Modulated By === | ||
| − | + | [[Ranking Systems]] | |
=== Possible Closure Effects === | === Possible Closure Effects === | ||
Revision as of 13:50, 16 January 2015
The one-sentence "definition" that should be in italics.
This pattern is a still a stub.
Contents
Examples
Online Games such as League of Legends, the Left 4 Dead series, and the Counter-Strike series are well-known for producing Ragequitting since they all require team work under pressure. When teams do not manage to coordinate, agree, or succeed this may become extremely frustrating for players and make them want to quit.
Using the pattern
A perceived Predictable Winner or an identified Dominant Strategy is typically not enough to provoke Ragequitting since this might just be due to others playing well. Ragequitting depends on players feeling frustrated to the point where quitting regardless of consequences for other players gameplay experience becomes the least bad alternative. This is typically happens to players either on due their own performance when meeting Challenging Gameplay or the inability of succeeding with Cooperation. The latter cause makes Betrayal a potential reason for Ragequitting, but only when players are not emotionally prepared for it. Pubstomping is a typical example of emergent feature that can be frustrating to experience since one is thrown into a disadvantageous gameplay situation with a strong possibility of being killed quickly and then have to experience the exact say thing directly again.
Designing for Spectacular Failure Enjoyment is a way to design against Ragequitting since the two experiences are mutually exclusive. While not directly countering the reasons for Ragequitting, punishing people that do it by negatively adjusting them in Ranking Systems for this behavior can help players control their behavior. Togetherness has a dual relationship with Ragequitting. First, people are less likely to ragequit if they are experiencing Togetherness with some of the other players since this typically would negatively affect these other players. Second, if Ragequitting does occur it will break Togetherness related to that player.
Consequences
The direct consequence of Ragequitting is of course that a player Surrenders. Since this was due to anger at what had happened during gameplay, Ragequitting is a good indicator that the quitting player had Emotional Engrossment. Scapegoats are created whenever a person blames other players for the problems that result in Ragequitting.
Relations
Can Instantiate
Cooperation, Emotional Engrossment, Scapegoats, Surrendering
Can Modulate
-
Can Be Instantiated By
Betrayal, Challenging Gameplay, Pubstomping
Can Be Modulated By
Possible Closure Effects
-
Potentially Conflicting With
Spectacular Failure Enjoyment, Togetherness
History
New pattern created in this wiki.
References
-
Acknowledgements
-
