Gotta stop playing team-based games by myself

I just end up raging. I understand people play for a variety of reasons and I understand that many team-based games don't have systems that actually support team play but encourage individual play but I love working with teams. Battlefield 4 (when it works) and Awesomenauts have been the worst offenders to me lately.

It's an epidemic that won't go away. I get it. But it sucks.

Have you considered joining a clan?

@BranKetra: Don't have time to commit to clans anymore.

@sirkibble2: Okay. With Destiny getting released next year, its innovations in single/multiplayer hybrid experiences might be adequate for you.

From the bit I've played, No More Room in Hell can lead to a bit of teamwork. I've found that even if a chunk of your team runs off and gets eaten by zombies, you can still be functional when there's only a couple of you working together.

Project Reality is based around working in a team. Sometimes teamwork on the Insurgent side in the Insurgency game mode is under used, but it doesn't break the game or the mode. It might not be what you're looking for but for teamwork I think it's best I've played :]

*edit: Teamwork is a big main part of Project Reality, so you don't need to worry about being a part of a clan or anything to have it.

For faster paces games though I haven't played team work-y ones lately! A few years back Day of Defeat: Source and Battlefield 2 led to teamwork semi-often.

Natural Selection 2 looks like a recent fast paced game that used lots of teamwork, but I haven't played it.

I've seen some people around Gamespot (or you could try something like Reddit or another website?) to organize a few people to log onto games at the same time and play together. Maybe something like that?

It's not the same experience since it's not competitive but I do enjoy those type of co-op experiences, too. Tons of hours logged into Borderlands 2.

I blame leaderboards. If games didn't start keeping track of k/d ratios, no one would give a crap if they win or lose.

I think those who tend to care about K/D don't pay too much attention to their win/lose ratio. Those who care about playing objectives or winning don't seem to be as worried about their K/D overall.

But I'm confused by what you said. Leaderboards don't tend to rank people by their K/D, do they? And if anything, if leaderboards were removed, I still think people would strive to win. Plus, Aagame only needs to keep track of kills and deaths for people to care about their ratio anyway.

Stats in general. When I played Jedi Knight 2 and Halo on PC I didn't care if I died, because the failure of defeat was consumed in that moment and then forgotten, I played for fun and that was it, I never got mad even when i got owned and I don't think ever ragequit a game. When I moved to CoD4 and I saw that I now had stats detailing my K/D, W/L and accuracy%, suddenly dying and wasting ammo became relevant, especially since friends can go and check your stats and compare them to theirs.

It may not be relevant for a lot of people, but for just as many it is.

I don't disagree, I just think that's a very narrow place to put the blame. The fact that there is an objective and there is a winner and a loser at the end gives reason for people to care. Take that away, then you have no one who would care if they won or loss.

Plus, if you think about a game like Battlefield, you have to earn your guns by ranking up. It's your personal rank, not a team rank, so you have people running around the map with their own personal agendas, not focused on the objective. That's a problem.

Awesomenauts has the same issue. You have to level up a character in order to earn new skills, so you have people mindlessly going in for kills on the opposing players rather than focusing on destroying the turrets. There's more nuance to that example but my point is, there's a personal agenda within a team game.

Maybe you should go into squads and stick with them in BF4

That's my point: some people care about ratios too much and they get pissed off. If leaderboards weren't there people would still play, but would play for nothing but fun.

You haven't heard? K/D ratio serves as a natural multiplier for penis length, and some gamers need all the help they can get in that department.

Maybe now you'll understand why people get so worked up over it. :P

I see! Although... Zen riddle: does the penis multiplier apply if one is female?

But that's not my point. Take away the ratios and stats and you still have a reason to care because there's competition. Take away the competition, then you get rid of the nonsense we were discussing. As long as there's competition, people will care too much.

And that riddle is a very good question... Hm...

Oh well then, yeah: multiplayer still works fine without stats, in fact I think it works better. Problem is, stats, unlocks and levels are a source of fidelization: people are more inclined to keep playing when there's something shiny within reach. Look at prestige in CoD: it literally gives you nothing but a different icon by your name and yet something so simple keeps people glued to the game. Of course the game becomes more like a second job by then and with jobs come stress and frustration.

@Black_Knight_00: Couldn't agree with you more.