[...]
Meh... enzo why are you shit-talking me like that? Get that sand out of your vagina dude.
First off, I have not posted this video here because I was frustrated. I created this video mainly to get a discussion started on the GTA Online forums regarding this abuse and as I thought that some people here would find it interesting aswell, I have posted it here too. It shows nicely how the GTA Online Multiplayer in general and the anti-cheat system differs from LW/SA:MP. Seeing your reaction shows me that you indeed are interested.
However... now regarding your defence of the abusers (which is completely out of sense, considering you being a role-model for fairplay, thus leading to my first question of this post):
You are putting it as if I was the one to ruin the match. But the matchmaking is done by the game engine. I don't join "noob games" and bash noobs. I only have 1 account (legit level 235). The score was 3-3, so it's not as if I had an easy job. The score would have been 4-0 for the enemy if it wasn't for me. So the teams were somewhat balanced because of me. Not to mention that we were about 40 minutes into the job until they decided to kick me. Plus they had the chance to kick me before the job started (in the lobby). There they saw my level (not that my level was higher than theirs, lol).
You don't see it as a problem that you can kick an enemy out of a competitive job just because he is winning? That's ridiculous. And no matter how much you dislike me, arguing that this feature was intended to be used in that way is completely unreasonable.
No, read again.
I don't allege that Rockstar implemented votekick in the intention of having the players kick their enemies when they are winning. Maybe i was a bit quick to presume the scope of consequences of implementing a votekick system, so i might explain further in more detail.
Votekick SystemsA votekick system is a system that allows all players of a match or a team equally to cast a vote against another player to remove said player from the current game session. If a sufficient ammount of people, usually playerpool size - x where x is in range of 1 to playerpoolsize/2+1, voted yes to get a player kicked said player will be removed based on the community decision. Votekick systems are mainly put in place to act as administrative measures that do not require a live administrator to be executed, thus reducing administrative effort.
Discussion:
+:
- Instant handling of cheaters and rulebreakers through the community base without waiting time for an administrator.
- Democratic structure ensures a fair based decision in theory.
- As being limited to a kick the measures are not permanent thus the ammount of power in community does not imply further consequences.
-:
- Specifying a reason for the kick is not necessary neither applicable, thus a reason is not necessary.
- Following from the above point, the votekick system is not limited to reasonable or official offences but to any common reasoning or none at all.
- The playerbase is not ensured to base their decisions on the necessary level of experience or even on a collaborative reason.
So to re-elaborate my previous post's paragraph:
If you play a game that implements a kind of administrative system you should be aware of how it works and what it's consequences are, because if you are playing the game you have agreed to be held subject to the administrative measures applicable in that game no matter if you have informed yourself or not. This is exactly the same at LWs. Only that the administrative power on LWs does not lie in the playerbase's hands (thank god) but in the responsibility of experienced administrators.
If you hold me up as a role-model of fairplay you did never understand my intentions from the beginning, because i am not. I'll explain this too just in case.
The ammount of fairplay in a game decides by the implementation design in the last release candidate version. (in theory, ofc inapplicable to early-access, beta-tests, DLCs, hotpatches, etc..) The implementation design is something the administrator has had no influence on. An administrator bases their decisions not on their or common understanding of fairness, but on a set of rules that are valid for the game they are administering. That the rules of LWs are so spot-on to the game balance that you have the feeling that administration's decisions are exceptionally fair is pure coincidence.
And to answer another thing you mentioned, from administrative viewpoint on Rockstar's side you were indeed the one ruining the round otherwise the community would not have voted you out, that is how a votekick system works and these are the consequences. And i can only repeat myself that i can unreservedly understand your problem with how this works, but if you await that i agree that it would be
ridiculous,
unreasonable or unjustified then i have to decline, because in the context of GTA Online it is
not.
I understand that you tried to exert a comparisson of how unfair GTA:O's administration is compared to LW's administrative standards, but really there is no base to compare both because the GTA:O's administration works differently and does not follow our conventions thus applying LWs viewpoint to it simply does not
suffice to draw a comparison.
tl;dr i am missing detailed examination of the matter in your posts. (Like i ever did not -_-)
