Idea - Reputation Points

[CombatShrine]

Idea - Reputation Points

A big problem on battle.net is that there is no way to know who is a jerk, who is a noob, and who is a decent player at first glance.

I have seen on other internet forums a system called "Reputation points." Whenever a member posts something extraordinarily well-articulated, posts hot picz, or provides solid proof of a spectacular achievement, other members can "rep" them. A higher reputation level indicates greater seniority and worth to the community.

What if you had the same thing in Diablo 3, or Blizzard games in general? What if someone is habitually a great trader? Or helps you on a difficult quest, at significant risk to themselves (e.g. in hardcore)? Or is just in general a nice guy? You could give them a reputation point.

To avoid abuse of the system, reputation points would be in low supply. Most systems I have seen have a time-based system for allotting rep points - e.g. you have 1 rep point to distribute as you see fit each week.

This system would add alot more accountability to people's actions online - treat others like a jerk, and you don't have any chance of getting reps, and you'll soon find yourself with no friends. "Negative reps" could be interesting, for players that treat others like crap.
Of course, you will see lots of people behaving sycophantically just to get "repz", but that seems tolerable compared to just dealing with people blindly on B.Net. Its also no guarantee that they are a good guy - but it at least provides some credible evidence that they may be.

It would be nice if you could restrict your games in this manner; e.g. only players with a rep level between x and y can join your game.

What you guys think?

 

[Kiroptus]

Re: Idea - Reputation Points

Nah I dont think its necessary, Blizzard just needs to design the game in way which grieving is not possible or have so little affect that someone would just not bother to make it.

A good example of this is TF2 the sequel to TFC. In TFC players of the same team could juggle each other with explosives and could also block each other. In TF2 they have no coalison dectetion and explosives dont affect other teammates. There is right now, no way to grief in TF2, one player could just play badly but they have no resources to annoy someone of their own team.

The problem with D2 is that there is way too much resources for grievers and bad manners in general, all Blizzard has to make is to design the game properly, to cut down their options. So I dont think we need something as a reputation system, besides we dont have the power to boot someone from your game.

There are some flaw in your proposed rep system, maybe I would like to play with people with no rep points, it could be someone who just bought the game or just never had the chance to earn rep points, it would create some separation in the community, we dont need it, blizzard can make it very grief-unfriendly, like they are already doing by getting rid of PK and global drops, the only way someone could be a jerk was to just play bad, in that case its not that much of a deal.

 

[raveharu]

Re: Idea - Reputation Points

Wrong section, should be posted here.

 

[Kaeros]

Re: Idea - Reputation Points

I see about 5 threads on the General's front page that should probably be moved to Suggestions -- as long as it stimulates discussion I'm not sure it's that big of a deal.

Personally, OP, I think a reputation system would do WONDERS for Diablo II. However, that's only because the game is such a mess right now, with so many griefers, trading scams, pickit users, maphackers, etc, etc etc.

With Diablo III, hopefully none of those things will be an issue! And if that's the case, then I don't see a reason for a ratings' system. If Tom the PKer/trade-scammer that I saw in DII wants to play with me in DIII, then that's fine, since there isn't much he can do to ruin my gaming experience.

I believe that squelching would work fine for any loud-mouths, and reputation points would only serve to segment the community.

 

[KTang]

Re: Idea - Reputation Points

Well there is the Trade Rating on this forum, but to be honest I think it does little at all.

Rep would be pretty cool ingame, albeit a touch unnecessary and easily abusable. Heck, I could be a total *** if I wanted and enter every game and just negative rep EVERYONE. How would you get around that? Oh sorry, just read your suggestion about countering such abuse, good idea. Mmh, that could work.

Good suggestion just unnecessary if you ask me however. I was hoping when I read the topic that rep would be more about PvP fame

KT

 

[Funkopotamus]

Re: Idea - Reputation Points

I think there would be a lot of "rush4rep" kind of stuff going on.

 

[CombatShrine]

Re: Idea - Reputation Points

I think there would be a lot of "rush4rep" kind of stuff going on.

Well, like I said, there would be people behaving childishly to get "repz", but that's life. Also, I strongly doubt rushing will be possible in Diablo 3.

 

[Risingred]

Re: Idea - Reputation Points

This would be a system similar to X-Box Live?
If you go online playing, say, street fighter 4, and you win a match, the sore loser will doc you rep points, no matter how polite you are. This has happened to me numerous times. Just saying.

I kind of just assumed that they'd have a better form of "squelching" in the new version of battle.net, hopefully beyond what they did with WoW (ignore lists, etc). I could go with this idea, yeah.

 

[5zigen]

Re: Idea - Reputation Points

Part of me on this issue screams exploitable.

The other part likes the idea of crowdsourcing in general.

Then I think of some of the things I would dock people for, being zealous about religion, talking about politics I don't agree with, etc. I don't know if people would deserve to get downrep for that kind of thing, but I can imagine in situations like pvp this would be abused.

 

[CombatShrine]

Re: Idea - Reputation Points

Well like I said, negative reps are just an idea.

But docking reps for proselytizing religious and political views on BNet seems fair. If I had a nickel every time I met one of those 9/11-Ron Paul-New World Order conspiracy nutballs, or the skinhead-HH88 bunch, I'd be able to just buy Blizzard out.

Like I said - it would add accountability to people's actions online. In Diablo 2, this system would be rather ineffective. There are too many hackers - organized groups of them. They would just rep each other to the max; I've even heard they have access to CD-Key lists or generators, so attaching the reps to the CDKey is ineffective.

In Diablo 3, hopefully the CDKey's will be more difficult to crack. Then all reps can be tied to YOUR cdkey. It doesn't matter how many accounts you make or how many aliases you come up with, or whether you decide to just start up again after a long hiatus. Your reps would still be tied to your CDKey.

 

[mouseman]

Re: Idea - Reputation Points

I had a thread going on about this also. I tried to counter some of the problems coming with this.

I read some of the old diablo 1 guides and I enjoyed the politeness and thoughtfulness those guides had towards other players. I was thinking how we could implement that in Diablo 3 gaming community and this is what I came up with.

A reputation system:

You can limit players joining the game through reputation the same way you can limit them by level. You can simply type the number of players allowed, the level difference allowed and the reputation needed to join the game.

How to gain reputation? Each account can give one reputation point to every other account. The trick is that you have to play a certain amount of time (say, 1 hour) with that account in the same game and/or complete quests in order to be able to give a positive or a negative reputation point to another account.

Very high amount of reputation points could allow an account holder to place multiple points, kick a player from the game or other things like that. This is optional, however, as it can lead to elitism and exploit.

The big thing is that nobody loses here. The players who like to get rushed, avoid quests and scam eachother can very well do that without reputation points. This system would just allow peaceful co-op players to find good and mature playing company easily. Everyone gets to play the game how they want to play it.

However, the idea is to make reputation points givable only when a player has already showed that he is a co-op player. There will be a great deal of rushing, begging and generally hopping in and out of games hoping to get quests without effort. Reputation points should be givable only when a player has proved to be worthy of giving them.

How this should be proved isn't really the main point of my suggestion. Maybe the 1 hour playing time isn't sufficient. Maybe it would require clearing an act together. Maybe only players who have completed every previous quest could give reputation points.

The main point is, however, that "normal" b.net players wouldn't be interested in reputation. It would be worthless for them. It would slow them down and tie them to boring co-op games without giving any real benefit to them or their characters. They could, as well as people who like to solo, play the game like they want to play it.

The game wouldn't revolve around reputation - it would just be a small feature for those who are interested in genuine cooperation.

I did get a lot of negative feedback about how this (still) would be exploited and so on. I still think it's a great idea and that with certain limitations it could work (one has to complete every quest to give reputation and/or complete a number of quests with the one his giving reputation to and/or play a certain amount of time together to give reputation). Really, how often do you see the "rush plz" -people to stay in one game for an hour? If those limitations were in place, there's no way they could give reputation.

And the basic problem with these discussions is that everyone suggests reputation is going to be like a central all-defining aspect of the game (and want to misunderstand you and prove that nothing will work). The way I see it, there could be achievements and all kinds of other stuff and reputation would be like this uncool feature for the co-op nerds all the bnet folk would avoid. Most of the people would probably think negative reputation is cool. But it would still allow peaceful co-oppers to find company more easily.

 

[CombatShrine]

Re: Idea - Reputation Points

I knew I couldn't be the only person who thunk'd up this awesome, genius idea [/smug].

After reading that thread, I don't know if a simple point system would suffice.

It would be great if when you looked at someone's profile you say:

Total feedback:
Positive feedback: some number
Negative feedback: some number

And then a list of comments made by the people who left them feedback. Next to each commenter's name would be their total feedback so you can dismiss negative comments from someone with zero feedback.

It seems alot more fair that way. Crowdsourcing ftw.

Hell, you go even simpler and just have it like on Youtube, where you have 1-5 stars and click on their name after completing a CAPTCHA test.

 

[sreda]

Re: Idea - Reputation Points

A big problem on battle.net is that there is no way to know who is a jerk, who is a noob, and who is a decent player at first glance.

I have seen on other internet forums a system called "Reputation points." Whenever a member posts something extraordinarily well-articulated, posts hot picz, or provides solid proof of a spectacular achievement, other members can "rep" them. A higher reputation level indicates greater seniority and worth to the community.

What if you had the same thing in Diablo 3, or Blizzard games in general? What if someone is habitually a great trader? Or helps you on a difficult quest, at significant risk to themselves (e.g. in hardcore)? Or is just in general a nice guy? You could give them a reputation point.

To avoid abuse of the system, reputation points would be in low supply. Most systems I have seen have a time-based system for allotting rep points - e.g. you have 1 rep point to distribute as you see fit each week.

This system would add alot more accountability to people's actions online - treat others like a jerk, and you don't have any chance of getting reps, and you'll soon find yourself with no friends. "Negative reps" could be interesting, for players that treat others like crap.
Of course, you will see lots of people behaving sycophantically just to get "repz", but that seems tolerable compared to just dealing with people blindly on B.Net. Its also no guarantee that they are a good guy - but it at least provides some credible evidence that they may be.

It would be nice if you could restrict your games in this manner; e.g. only players with a rep level between x and y can join your game.

What you guys think?

Any kind of up/downvote system is just going to be abused. Don't get me wrong, I read your entire post but I still come to the conclusion it will be abused. Getting a single rep point per week means if one guy helps you out, you give him the point then the next guy to help you won't get that rep point, or consequently if someone knows you used your rep point then he will assume the position of being a dick and get away with it, more or less to that idea. Giving a maximum of one rep per person can also be abused, simply have a group of your friends log on and just upvote each other every week, and you'll keep accumulating points at a steady rate, sooner or later you'll have a high rep. There will be those who spam downvotes as well.

I say rather than a rep system, a ticket system should be in play. Much like in WoW, so it can handled those who are griefers and play the game the wrong way. That would handle griefers and up.

There really isn't a good way to add a nice reputation system without it being flawed in one way or another so I say it's best off just leaving it out of the game. Unless it really had to be implemented, then I would suggest something along the lines of a little profile where people can write comments about how you played, and it would show how many times you've played with that person before so to make sure you aren't getting fed good comments by your friends (this person has played with this person X times in the last week). Someone who writes a negative comment about you can also be checked up, and if all the reviews that person wrote were negative, then we can assume that idiot was a bad player.