I give up.

“Adding a Surrender option could tempt players to bail out at the slightest setback, removing focus from the game and potentially introduce even more toxic behavior.” 

I really can’t believe a company as veteran as Blizzard would be this naive. This is Blizzard's reasoning behind not giving players a surrender option in Heroes of the Storm. But people are starting to be surprised that, even without the official option to surrender, negative Nancies and all-around toxic players are finding other ways to surrender. I called this the minute I knew there was no surrender option in the game. Removing the surrender option from the game won't change people's attitudes. It'll just make them change how they are toxic. No one will play a game they believe is unwinnable.

I’ve railed about Blizzard’s decision to not include a surrender option for months now, though. I disagree on a fundamental level that “no game is unwinnable,” not necessarily for mechanical reasons or because of a substantial early lead, but because for a game to be winnable, you have to have A) people capable of recognizing, admitting, and correcting the mistaken behavior that led them to be behind (a rarity online where people would much rather blame everyone else than recognize that they may possibly be culpable in a loss) and B) people willing to put in the extra effort to make such a comeback possible. The latter is more common and, I will admit, I was on the winning side of a SUBSTANTIAL comeback yesterday that was very gratifying.

But I’ve also been on the losing side of such comebacks and they are heartbreaking.

And that’s the other side of my argument. Sure, it’s a pain to have half of your games end in surrenders. But a surrender is only frustrating for half of the players involved...the winning side. And even then, it can be a huge boost to your ego to be in a position where you’re stomping someone so soundly that they feel surrender is the only legitimate option. Still, I’ve had my share of groans where I’m playing well and just getting into the rhythm and the game ends. But I’ve also typed my share of “let’s just surrender and try this again, shall we?” after a domino-effect of terrible mistakes led to a game that is just frustrating. And that’s the big thing. While it’s a mild nuisance for the winning team to have to stop a full-on stomp, it can be absolutely game-ruiningly infuriating to be on the receiving side of that stomp. Maybe I just want to throw in the towel and start again fresh.

So why does Blizzard feel the need to remove the option altogether and force me to coincide with their personal philosophy? If I believe, like them, that no game is unwinnable, I would never try to surrender. Sure, Heroes games are typically shorter, but I can recall quite clearly several games that I was 99% (because I can never be 100%) sure that we were going to lose at five minutes (we’ve all been there. One player AFK pushing in a lane, refuses to help with tributes/seeds/skulls, there’s no way to win when one or two players refuse to play with the team) but the game goes out to 30 or even more minutes because the enemy team just haaaaaaaas to get that last objective or just haaaaaas to push down all of the keeps. We’ve all been there too. Not only are we losing but now, because Blizzard feels like “no game is unwinnable,” we have to sit there and have our noses rubbed into it to boot. That’s not fun at all. And it’d only be marginally less fun for the enemy team (who would still enjoy the thrill of victory) if we were allowed to surrender. I’ve also often heard that it’s annoying to have people throw up a surrender vote and start yelling at people after one bad play 20 minutes into a League game. And I agree. That is annoying. But that person is NOT going to turn into the picture of determination just because surrender isn’t an option. Removing the surrender option from the game doesn’t remove an annoyance from the game. It just forced the toxic players to find their outlets elsewhere. And actually, if surrender was an option, you’d have an easier way to at least divest yourself of said toxic player. I’d rather surrender a potentially (but unlikely) winnable game at 20 minutes and not have to listen to a guy call me a fag who should uninstall and shoot himself than be forced to listen to him while his avatar sits on the spawn point while the enemy team finishes us off at their leisure.

I’ve always said this, but taking away options is rarely a good idea. Maybe just make it very, very difficult to surrender. Obviously putting the surrender option at 20 minutes wouldn’t work in Heroes where the longest games are very rarely 30. But they could put it at 15 or even 10. But more to the point, if you make it so everyone has to agree to the surrender, you’re ensuring that only the most terrible stomps (or a premade) will be required for such a surrender. Perhaps you could put in a 12 Angry Men system where the vote, once initiated, remains on screen and one player can argue their point to try and convince everyone. Maybe if everyone (or even three or four out of five people) vote no, the surrender option goes away for the rest of the game. Blizzard is a smart company. They can figure out a way. But taking away the option, as you say, only encourages people to surrender in worse ways, by going AFK or, worse, just feeding the enemy team more kills...generally while lambasting and just generally being toxic to their entire team. And those people are going to make a miserable situation even more miserable.