The removing players from game got real

I understand the whole ideology of “host should call the shots” and he/she still would with anything but the most specific of circumstances.

A host would need to move at the speed of light to punch out players who are about to move on a Legendary or Pearl that randomly dropped, but the practice of tossing players the moment a raid bosses is dead (or as it is dying) is becoming very common.

Players can have a “kick-restriction” or “no restriction” tag by their open games, and players who want that level of protection can opt in to it. The most it would cost a leader to remove a disruptive player even WITH THAT would be about 8 eridium, the only thing it would prevent is what is occurring right now.

Just as easily as you can say; “The fastest would grab everything and ditch the game” one can say “the host can kick everyone to oblivion”. The difference between the two is in the WORST case scenario for restrictions, the fastest gets the nicest item, and in the other worst case scenario the Host gets everything.

BL as a series has constantly listened to the fan community and offered an array of options. I actually appreciate exactly how much they’re willing to evolve, and seeing as this is a game around co-op play, it has to come to fruition that options of play will soon enter the fold.

What tags? I haven’t heard anything about these kind of tags.

Also I didn’t exactly catch your point. What are you saying overall?

I’ll elaborate it like this mate;

I’m claiming that one way to remedy this high booting problem is a system that could be patched in that allows you to open an online game with an option.

This option allows you to make a “non-restrictive” mode, where the host can boot any player at any time, or inversely, a restrictive mode where during raids or other special event triggers, the host can only boot players at the expense of restarting the raid.

Then players who join could have the option of checking if they don’t care what kind of game they join, or they choose to join a restrictive game.

Oh, okay then. Yeah, maybe that could be a decent idea, but it probably doesn’t come to fruition any longer. Maybe on BL3, and even then I’d prefer my own similar idea. Much more thorough. (And if you want to say something about it, please do it on that thread.)

It always sucks, but it especially stings when you’re doing a lot of work for (or with) the team. Like the guy I joined with my Siren – I usually get kicked if my I/O isn’t favorable, but in this case, I had my hands full reviving people to take as many shots at the Leviathan. Long story short, I’m the last one in the session, and I wait for him to arrive at the treasure room and lead the charge in. Instead, I get the auto-save indicator and RFP. Talk about [censored] gratitude.

Maybe if they put a copy of the legendary drop in each players backpack in the game. That way everyone gets the same gun with the same parts?

2 Likes

To be honest, I agree. Since starting over again on the PS4, coming from the PS3, the lack of general player etiquette is abysmal, to the point that I now very very rarely host public games, whereas previously I usually set to public as soon as I went online (the more the merrier and all that!).

I spent 2 hrs trying to get into public matches. some games I got kicked at the loading screen and others as soon as I spawn. 1 game I was good enough to fight Hyperious but got kicked anyway when he had like 10% health, only 1 group of guys actually invited to the chat party and let me play in their game. 2 hrs for only 20 or so mins of actual gameplay. I just don’t understand. PS3 was never this bad

You’d have gotten a copy of the Law, too, because mission reward. And if you’re worried about level, 100% melee is 100% melee and won’t have a scaling issue. And the weapon damage of the law is sh*t anyway. The guy probably didn’t think he was doing anything wrong.

Once you learn that random games suck - sometimes - come here and post for people to play with. A group of European’s did this on the PS3 in 2013 and I made some really good friends and playing partners, one whom i’m still playing with on the PS4 Handsome Collection. I’ve also played with people from the U.S to Singapore from the old GBX forum, so the online gaming section should be alive right now!!

However, I did also meet some genuinely good people in random games, so it’s hard to know what to do exactly…but use this forum for what it’s purpose is. Happy Looting :smile:

1 Like

I also met great guys who I played with.
Yet, there is a bunch who added me and haven’t sent a message ever nor played with.

I suppose it’s like legendary drops…get lucky sometimes :smile:

1 Like

Yeah xDDD
To do: clean up Steam friend list xD

I almost never play random match up games. I solicit players in the forum both for trading and eventually to play with. I suggest you do the same and post a call for players that would be willing to play with you. If you’re hosting you can always do group chat and discuss whether it be rules, strategy or whatever. And whether it’ll go perfectly as planned and such at least you’ll have a better chance not experiencing what you did. If players don’t agree well then they could always leave the game. Just my 2 cents anyway.

I understand why chat parties exist but it also bugs me. What if I join a game where I want to chat but he’s in a party.

For what it’s worth I play pretty fair. But if I notice someone is a bit of loot ninja I start to get aggressive and grabby. But I’d like more host options. Quest acceptance is important to me. Usually exits aren’t too big a deal but sometimes they really are and the result is sometimes me kicking someone for trying to exit persistently before we are all ready - we are fighting something or trying to do something before the exit and we all keep entering to menu, once those guys start running to the exit the guy can try again. Or I kick someone for blocking us from exiting. I’m fair about it. I space it out. Eventually there should be no excuse for blocking us all (and me being the host I make that judgement call).

If we simply had instanced loot we’d have a lot less problems. And a lot more multiplayer sessions going.

Also, it’d be great you could be on a different map from the host, like in Diablo 2 and 3. Then map exits wouldn’t be as big a deal.

Also, there is no way to actually ever completely block “beat the boss, kick everyone”. Why? Because the player can walk 8 feet and shut off their internet router. Unless you have central server based hosting of Borderlands, which many of the fans would hate.

That said, I think it would be cool to provide the option of playing either way (host yourself or join a server, along with of course joining some players hosted game). The advantage of playing/connecting to a central server host could be multifold. Your character would probably be stored on the server/cloud. “Unhackable” characters because the file isn’t on your machine. No hacked items or duping could happen. Diablo 2 provided this option and it didn’t let you use your server characters on local games or vice versa. The problem is it creates another player divide.

1 Like