Project 23

[Baker]

Larger image version: View



If you've seen the Undergate, the Rocket Arena Gateway or played RQuake or ever experienced Gunter's Hub back a few years ago, you likely have a good idea of #1. If you've seen some of the screenshots I've posted at Inside3D or a couple here, you likely know where #3 is going. Unlike free-for-all games, team games like Capture The Flag or Team Deathmatch are exceptionally vulnerable to anti-social behavior: which is what #4 looks to fix.

Read more ...

[Baker]

In real-life, if you engage in a ton of anti-social behavior, you become an outcast. But on the internet, anti-social behavior usually gets free reign. Most of problems Quake has are social problems where a small number of troublemakers can do whatever they want. This is because of the infrastructure we have.

One problem is that "administrators" should not run things. Not forum administrators, not server administrators. It should work with that ever awesome real-world force to be reckoned with: peer pressure with teeth!

The IHOC community used this model (Smokey, Phenom, myself and Mindzfield remember this) and it worked very well.

[Gavin]

This looks interesting. I am very late to the quake one party, but I can see how much of a mess quake online seems right now. If some of this would be implemented, it would be much more organized and more fun.

[Baker]

This looks interesting. I am very late to the quake one party, but I can see how much of a mess quake online seems right now.

February 2006: A few hand full of players.
February 2007: 40-60 players a night
February 2009: 30 players a night

(Infighting, bad behavior, players abusing other players in all kinds of way (it was unreal) ...)

February 2012: A trickle of players a night

It is a mess right now.

However, this is point of least resistance to change. Time to restructure everything without resistance.

[golden_boy]

If I'm not mistaken, I suggested a trust-based (ie social group) system to counter bad behaviour on servers years ago. Nice that someone finally understood it.

[frank]

I see Kimp being the assassinator of the president in this democracy hehe

[Cobalt]

To me FFA / DM is totally centered around one person - yourself. You kill or be killed, no one watches your back, its pure ego vs ego, goal is to eliminate as many people as you can without killing yourself in the process. Thats why I am not crazy about it. Teamplay by nature IS more social, because you need to communicate with people in order to bring out the potential the entire team has to offer. Its more challenging, more interesting and definately more social , IF you have the right group of people. Of course, if you are not a team player, you will be a troublemaker, and ought to stick to ffa.

[Baker]

If I'm not mistaken, I suggested a trust-based (ie social group) system to counter bad behaviour on servers years ago. Nice that someone finally understood it.

Yeah, but years ago I didn't have enough experience to be able to code that kind of thing. And the environment was different and, for example, we hadn't really encountered a situation where someone might actually intentionally ruin games.

You've been right about a number of these kind of things in the past.

But I think at the time everyone embraced the "Wild Wild West" atmosphere and enjoyed the heated debates in the forums.

Then we got to watch it get all personal where some people really, really hated each other and others had intentions like actually fueling those kind of sentiments.

I guess that is experience and the real world, maybe.

Experience is just a rehearsal for getting things right the next time.

[R00k]

Most of the anti-social behavior on servers come right down to the who has the admin code. U can currently mute, kick, ban, kill, unteam, etc.

[Phenom]

In America first you get the money, then you get the power, then you get the women.