Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

Reputation: Avoid Me

OP CyberGuardFL

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2
Microsoft has a player reputation level called "Avoid Me".
How about an option in Halo infinite that would actually allow us to avoid those with such a distinct reputation?
After all, when you label someone in such a manner there has to be a way to do just that.
Honestly I’d just picture most the players that have that are just really good at the game or tea bag to much.
My own experience with them is that they just seem to enjoy ruining the game for everyone else (for example betraying you for no apparent reason).
I just think that nobody needs to be in the same team with jerks like that and what is "Avoid Me" good for if it is impossible to do just that?
Microsoft has a player reputation level called "Avoid Me".
How about an option in Halo infinite that would actually allow us to avoid those with such a distinct reputation?
After all, when you label someone in such a manner there has to be a way to do just that.
The reputation system is a joke imo. Players report others just because they lose, many players are honest, but many are bad sports and would avoid out of spite. I'm all for better online experiences, but these systems get abused. Tell me how it would be fair and you'll get my support.
Yeah I have to agree with evil, I have seen similar systems like this get abused and as such am skeptical of it, but if it were to be implemented well I would be quite happy with it
Microsoft has a player reputation level called "Avoid Me".
How about an option in Halo infinite that would actually allow us to avoid those with such a distinct reputation?
After all, when you label someone in such a manner there has to be a way to do just that.
That almost sounds like a Badge of Honor.
To meet me is to meet your Doom!
Xbox already uses a similar feature across all of Live. Players with red "Avoid Me" reputation are mostly matched with other "Avoid Me" players. I'm sure there are exceptions, like if matchmaking doesn't have alot of players or if the bad player is in a party with good players, but for the most part such players are prioritized to play with other problematic players.
Allowing players to influence how other player gets matched seems like a terrible idea. If you want to remove people with unwanted behavior from matchmaking, it should be based on real, concrete data about said behavior, not on some vague "Avoid Me" label based on subjective ratings from other players.
I was avoided a ton in Halo 3 because my team I played with was really good. It takes forever to find matches like that. That system gets abused and its pretty annoying.
My personal experience so far has been that every single 'Avoid Me' player carried that label for a very good reason and not because someone abused the reporting tool. Every single one of those 'Avoid Me' players would betray their own team sometimes because they think they deserve the -whatever- weapon it is they want at the moment or they just seem to enjoy betraying their team for no other reason than them enjoying such unsocial behavior.

I am not taking anything away from anyone else when I decide I don't want to play with a certain people. Nobody is forced to use such an option if it were available.

Matchmaking shouldn't just "try" to "prioritize" - once someone has earned 'Avoid Me' that is all they should get until they have proven that they deserve playing with 'good' reputation players.

Besides, I doubt you get this particular label very easily and after only a few abusing reports.

I just don't see any disadvantage for the general public when players can chose with whom they want to play with with whom they don't want to play. If I restrict my search parameters too much then I probably will have a hard time finding a match (or maybe I won't). I just don't think anyone should dictate that we all have to play with the bad apples in the basket.
eviltedi wrote:
Microsoft has a player reputation level called "Avoid Me".
How about an option in Halo infinite that would actually allow us to avoid those with such a distinct reputation?
After all, when you label someone in such a manner there has to be a way to do just that.
The reputation system is a joke imo. Players report others just because they lose, many players are honest, but many are bad sports and would avoid out of spite. I'm all for better online experiences, but these systems get abused. Tell me how it would be fair and you'll get my support.
The option to avoid people with the "Avoid Me," tag isn't hurting either side, so there's no reason to not add it other than limitations.
eviltedi wrote:
Microsoft has a player reputation level called "Avoid Me".
How about an option in Halo infinite that would actually allow us to avoid those with such a distinct reputation?
After all, when you label someone in such a manner there has to be a way to do just that.
The reputation system is a joke imo. Players report others just because they lose, many players are honest, but many are bad sports and would avoid out of spite. I'm all for better online experiences, but these systems get abused. Tell me how it would be fair and you'll get my support.
The option to avoid people with the "Avoid Me," tag isn't hurting either side, so there's no reason to not add it other than limitations.
It will hurt innocent players that are targets of hate because they're good. We already have a flawed reputation system, no need to add one to Halo unless it's fair. Like I said to the OP, tell me how it would be fair and I'll happily support it, I'll support anything that improves our gaming experiences, but many good players will get their reputation destroyed or find match making restricted by sore losers and their salty minions.
My personal experience so far has been that every single 'Avoid Me' player carried that label for a very good reason and not because someone abused the reporting tool. Every single one of those 'Avoid Me' players would betray their own team sometimes because they think they deserve the -whatever- weapon it is they want at the moment or they just seem to enjoy betraying their team for no other reason than them enjoying such unsocial behavior.
Do you check the reputation of every player you match? Because this seems like a situation where there'd be bias towards checking people who "deserve" the label, and not bothering to check players who you think play normally.

I am not taking anything away from anyone else when I decide I don't want to play with a certain people. Nobody is forced to use such an option if it were available.
You're decreasing the potential matchmaking pool for a subset of players, so you are very definitely taking something away from someone.

Besides, I doubt you get this particular label very easily and after only a few abusing reports.
But you can't guarantee it, and even if it isn't easy to get, it's based on subjective opinions of other players, and therein lies the problem. There are a variety of false reports that may be not at all uncommon. People very easily mistake lag, or even good players, for hacking. If not that, people have vastly varying notions of what consitutes as "cheating". Then there's of course just plain rage reporting, where someone is just having a bad day and singles you out (or reports everyone they played against).

The falsely labeled players are of course only going to be a subset of players with the "Avoid Me" reputation. However, there's no point in using such a poor system in a game when you can do better, and have matchmaking be completely data driven. Instead of relying on subjective feedback from players, you can focus on specific unwanted behaviors and collect data indicative of them. Want to get rid of team killers? You can track how often a player kills their teammates. What about those run after you, spraying you with an AR if you grab a power weapon in front of them, but don't kill you? You can track damage done to teammates. Griefers who die intentionally to ruin your match? You can track suicides or abnormal KD-stats.

When a developer has the ability to track every aspect of player behavior, they can label players based on objective data about their behavior, and thus create a system that has much less room for false positive, and that is potentially much faster at catching and dealing with unwanted behavior. Not to mention, there's always a very specific clear reason like "team killing" why a player gets labeled rather than some vague notion like "cheating" or "unsporting behavior".

In other words, the reason not to use the "Avoid Me" label in matchmaking is not that it's completely useless, but that there exists a clearly superior method of dealing with unwanted behavior that could be used instead.
tsassi wrote:
Want to get rid of team killers? You can track how often a player kills their teammates.
Please do! That would work for me.

tsassi wrote:
What about those run after you, spraying you with an AR if you grab a power weapon in front of them, but don't kill you? You can track damage done to teammates.
Absolutely! Would you like to go hunting with VP -Yoink- who then accidentally shoots you in the face? I guess not. So even if it isn't intentionally, some people are so trigger happy that they just shoot at anything in front of them. So tracking damage done to teammates and the option to avoid some of those players would be awesome.

tsassi wrote:
Griefers who die intentionally to ruin your match? You can track suicides or abnormal KD-stats.

Yes, please!

tsassi wrote:
When a developer has the ability to track every aspect of player behavior, they can label players based on objective data about their behavior, and thus create a system that has much less room for false positive, and that is potentially much faster at catching and dealing with unwanted behavior. Not to mention, there's always a very specific clear reason like "team killing" why a player gets labeled rather than some vague notion like "cheating" or "unsporting behavior".
Why hasn't that being done yet?
Honestly I’d just picture most the players that have that are just really good at the game or tea bag to much.
I had that rep once. Its def a little of both. Well that or if you go into comp and team kill.
eviltedi wrote:
The reputation system is a joke imo. Players report others just because they lose, many players are honest, but many are bad sports and would avoid out of spite. I'm all for better online experiences, but these systems get abused. Tell me how it would be fair and you'll get my support.
While I think there are 'bad sports' who would abuse the system just because they lost I also think that those very same people on the other hand would love to have that good player on their own team. By avoiding them all that's left would be those that are so bad you don't want to play with them either. That being said I doubt the number of false/abusive reporting just because someone was too good is insignificant.

And the data is there in most cases: early quitting/DNF for example. Someone who has 8 DNF out of their past 40 matches has a whopping 20% DNF. Why does anyone who isn't even close to that DNF rate even deserves to be matched together with such a person? And that person didn't even had an 'Avoid Me' rep.
tsassi wrote:
My personal experience so far has been that every single 'Avoid Me' player carried that label for a very good reason and not because someone abused the reporting tool. Every single one of those 'Avoid Me' players would betray their own team sometimes because they think they deserve the -whatever- weapon it is they want at the moment or they just seem to enjoy betraying their team for no other reason than them enjoying such unsocial behavior.
Do you check the reputation of every player you match? Because this seems like a situation where there'd be bias towards checking people who "deserve" the label, and not bothering to check players who you think play normally.

I am not taking anything away from anyone else when I decide I don't want to play with a certain people. Nobody is forced to use such an option if it were available.
You're decreasing the potential matchmaking pool for a subset of players, so you are very definitely taking something away from someone.

Besides, I doubt you get this particular label very easily and after only a few abusing reports.
But you can't guarantee it, and even if it isn't easy to get, it's based on subjective opinions of other players, and therein lies the problem. There are a variety of false reports that may be not at all uncommon. People very easily mistake lag, or even good players, for hacking. If not that, people have vastly varying notions of what consitutes as "cheating". Then there's of course just plain rage reporting, where someone is just having a bad day and singles you out (or reports everyone they played against).

The falsely labeled players are of course only going to be a subset of players with the "Avoid Me" reputation. However, there's no point in using such a poor system in a game when you can do better, and have matchmaking be completely data driven. Instead of relying on subjective feedback from players, you can focus on specific unwanted behaviors and collect data indicative of them. Want to get rid of team killers? You can track how often a player kills their teammates. What about those run after you, spraying you with an AR if you grab a power weapon in front of them, but don't kill you? You can track damage done to teammates. Griefers who die intentionally to ruin your match? You can track suicides or abnormal KD-stats.

When a developer has the ability to track every aspect of player behavior, they can label players based on objective data about their behavior, and thus create a system that has much less room for false positive, and that is potentially much faster at catching and dealing with unwanted behavior. Not to mention, there's always a very specific clear reason like "team killing" why a player gets labeled rather than some vague notion like "cheating" or "unsporting behavior".

In other words, the reason not to use the "Avoid Me" label in matchmaking is not that it's completely useless, but that there exists a clearly superior method of dealing with unwanted behavior that could be used instead.
I agree with the thrust of your argument, but surely if the XBL enforcement system is too open to abuse 343 as a Xbox Studio can suggest this is improved.

Game developers can include systems in their own games, but generally speaking negative behaviour carries across games: services like Xbox live need to be able to make use of the data to improve the service
MorseyBaby wrote:
I agree with the thrust of your argument, but surely if the XBL enforcement system is too open to abuse 343 as a Xbox Studio can suggest this is improved.

Game developers can include systems in their own games, but generally speaking negative behaviour carries across games: services like Xbox live need to be able to make use of the data to improve the service
I don't think the XBL reputation system is as abuse-able as some people believe. First off, XBL Policy and Enforcement Team is a group of actual people who investigate reports and then dole out action accordingly. So wrongful reports should be noticeable. They even say that reputation takes into account multiple variables, only one of which is player reports, and that spamming reports on a player will not unfairly lower their rep. Certain types of report may result in an automated response given the nature of the report and limits on what info XBLPET has access to (e.g. reporting someone for a offensive communication in voice chat may lead to an automatic temporary communication ban since XBL doesn't record your voice chats, afaik). But a report for cheating must be investigated given the severity of the allegation.

That's not to say that the reputation system can't be improved or that nobody has every wrongfully been given Avoid Me reputation, but I don't think it's as rampant an issue as some believe. XBLPET must be able to peer into game specific data to be able to respond to certain reports, so I imagine they can see if someone is a team killer or quitter or whatever kind of griefing they got reported for.
Chimera30 wrote:
MorseyBaby wrote:
I agree with the thrust of your argument, but surely if the XBL enforcement system is too open to abuse 343 as a Xbox Studio can suggest this is improved.

Game developers can include systems in their own games, but generally speaking negative behaviour carries across games: services like Xbox live need to be able to make use of the data to improve the service
I don't think the XBL reputation system is as abuse-able as some people believe. First off, XBL Policy and Enforcement Team is a group of actual people who investigate reports and then dole out action accordingly. So wrongful reports should be noticeable. They even say that reputation takes into account multiple variables, only one of which is player reports, and that spamming reports on a player will not unfairly lower their rep. Certain types of report may result in an automated response given the nature of the report and limits on what info XBLPET has access to (e.g. reporting someone for a offensive communication in voice chat may lead to an automatic temporary communication ban since XBL doesn't record your voice chats, afaik). But a report for cheating must be investigated given the severity of the allegation.

That's not to say that the reputation system can't be improved or that nobody has every wrongfully been given Avoid Me reputation, but I don't think it's as rampant an issue as some believe. XBLPET must be able to peer into game specific data to be able to respond to certain reports, so I imagine they can see if someone is a team killer or quitter or whatever kind of griefing they got reported for.
I also quite agree with this, but unfortunately I see a lot of people who for whatever reason seem to have no trust in the current system. Personally I think the balance is about right, but I can see how some could abuse it if they wanted to
Chimera30 wrote:
MorseyBaby wrote:
I agree with the thrust of your argument, but surely if the XBL enforcement system is too open to abuse 343 as a Xbox Studio can suggest this is improved.

Game developers can include systems in their own games, but generally speaking negative behaviour carries across games: services like Xbox live need to be able to make use of the data to improve the service
I don't think the XBL reputation system is as abuse-able as some people believe. First off, XBL Policy and Enforcement Team is a group of actual people who investigate reports and then dole out action accordingly. So wrongful reports should be noticeable. They even say that reputation takes into account multiple variables, only one of which is player reports, and that spamming reports on a player will not unfairly lower their rep. Certain types of report may result in an automated response given the nature of the report and limits on what info XBLPET has access to (e.g. reporting someone for a offensive communication in voice chat may lead to an automatic temporary communication ban since XBL doesn't record your voice chats, afaik). But a report for cheating must be investigated given the severity of the allegation.

That's not to say that the reputation system can't be improved or that nobody has every wrongfully been given Avoid Me reputation, but I don't think it's as rampant an issue as some believe. XBLPET must be able to peer into game specific data to be able to respond to certain reports, so I imagine they can see if someone is a team killer or quitter or whatever kind of griefing they got reported for.
They've got tens of millions of users to deal with. I wouldn't count on too many of the reports be human reviewed. And what is directly actionable by a human I'd expect to be public facing information, e.g., offensive gamertag/picture/bio. "Cheating" for example is such a nonspecific allegation that I wouldn't trust on it being investigated, unless of course it actually refers to modding or hacking specifically, in which case it should really read "modding or hacking". Things like tema killing or griefing would of course most likely fall under "unsporting behavior", and I have my doubts about how much of that is actionable. After all, as I said in my post: if you have a way of quickly seeing whether someone is a team killer, you can completely automate dealing with team killlers in your game, in which case you don't need human review which is less effective and more error prone anyway.

I've never implied that a large portion of "Avoid Me" labels would be false positives, let alone that most of the false positives would come from intentional abuse. However, I inherently find automated systems based on subjective human feedback suspicious. If you have a human checking that reports are legitimate before any punishment is applied, that's fine. But the feedback itself shouldn't be in control of anything.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2