Does the kill/death ratio need to go away?

Dcswirlonly_bigger
Monday, April 11, 2011
EDITOR'S NOTEfrom Demian Linn

Daniel argues that by tracking and emphasizing each player's kill/death ratio, objective-based multiplayer shooters encourage selfish play styles.

I admit it -- I'm part of the problem. In almost every game of Battlefield: Bad Company 2 or Team Fortress 2 I just roll sniper and get into duels with other snipers, while everyone else actually tries to win. I know people hate that, but what are you gonna do when you have a pitiful kill/death ratio staring you in the face all the time?

I'm certainly not the first one to complain about this phenomenon. In 1UP.com’s review of MAG -- a game involving teamwork on several levels -- writer Tom Chick feared that MAG could become a noble failure. Chick's teammates "wanted to attack point H, which was more open and easier to snipe at from a distance. They didn't care that there were already other squads on H, and therefore it fell to us to keep pressure on G,” he wrote. “They just wanted more kills. They eventually wandered over to H anyway. And they were the highest scorers in our squad. Those guys will be the death of MAG.”

 

Taking KDR stats away from team and objective-based games would encourage snipers (and other players) to actually do what they’re supposed to do: defend positions and support their team by spotting enemies. To my knowledge, BC2 is the only game that even gives you assist points for spotting.

I can understand that KDR is a good metric for skill in a deathmatch scenario. In any objective-based game, however, it’s really counter to the main goal -- helping your team win. And I don’t understand why developers haven’t picked up on that yet and tweaked their designs accordingly.

Most games these days give more points for completing objectives, but each player’s KDR continues to be a distraction. In a mode like Conquest in BC2, kills should be a means to an end -- that end being to help your team capture bases. If the game has to award points at all, they should go to the entire team rather than individuals.

One game that heavily de-emphasized kills for scoring was Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory. In fact, spy players could rarely kill mercenaries at all -- their tools were geared towards disabling mercs so that the spies could complete their objectives. Mercs had a relatively easier time killing spies, but the game still hinged on protecting the objective.

OK, maybe I’m complaining about this because I can’t manage a 1:1 KDR in most games, but you don’t see people sacrificing their team for their own points in real sports do you? (Oh...wait.)

 
Problem? Report this post
BITMOB'S SPONSOR
Adsense-placeholder
Comments (11)
Dscn0568_-_copy
April 09, 2011

While I don't play shooters, I can't see something like a kill/death ratio ever going away. It's a bragging rights thing for casual players, and it's also probably something more serious players take into consideration when forming teams.

Avatarheader
April 09, 2011

I don't think it should be taken away, but perhaps there should be greater rewards for teamwork based objectives to draw that particular crowd away from putting all their importance on KDR.

Default_picture
April 09, 2011

In point of fact, you see players "sacrificing" their team for their own points in real sports all the time. It's one of the most commonly-levied complaints at pro athletes--that they're not a "team player." Obviously, this isn't a good thing, but just saying...

Download
April 10, 2011

Was this inspired by the GAF topic on this subject? Anyway, I like TF2s approach on this matter: Hiding K/D and using points to gauge how well you're playing; it's very easy for a medic or engineer to get to the top of the leaderboard.

Default_picture
April 10, 2011
Kdr are a distraction. I for one don't put mind to that. A guy /girl with a good kdr can die just the same. Having players overly concerned about kdr does take away from a lot of the objective based games. Not sure how players will react to a game that doesn't show off their skills in certain areas. Even I check to see my status every once in a while but not a major concern for me.
Itsame_
April 10, 2011
Although still a major presence, I also like how Killzone approached the KDR dilemma. As long as I play Warzone and run around as every class doing their secondary skills for half the match, I would get bonuses for the player with the most heals or repairs. Still, I guess it hasen't resolved the issue since so many other plays are distracted by the KDR. Also @DanieI I rarely post above a .80 ratio for KDR, so I feel you on that.
Dcswirlonly_bigger
April 10, 2011

@Richard

It was actually inspried by a previous GAF topic.

Lolface
April 11, 2011

I don't like kdr because no one should know how much I suck. Same goes to win/loss ratios, especially in fighting games that count losses against the computer. Why do my games like to embarress me?

Img_20100902_162803
April 11, 2011

Not sure if I fully agree with this...it is like saying Baseball is ruined by the fans who follow stats.

Default_picture
April 12, 2011

Its a tough question cos ultimately if you are getting killed more than you are doing the killing then you are going to be giving points away - in a straight up Team Death Match KDR is king. Though in objective based games flag captures and bomb planting etc is what wins the game - sacrifice can be the answer.

I agree totally about BC2 - Spotting is Free points why don't more people do it!?

I guess it's your choice - if you are having fun then ignore it and keep playing the way you are, but if your ration is 1:50 you can't be having that much fun can you?

Tumb
April 18, 2011

I think the whole idea is brilliant: get rid of KDR in objective-based but not deathmatch modes. Those who don't like that kind of game won't play it and there you have a great lobby-ful of like-minded people.

And/or award points for the team instead of individuals, if at all - that idea is great as well.

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.