Ian, do we have to finish online games when people quit?

[Poetique]

I personally think it would be 100% acceptable to simply allow a win if a person quits after the 1st half. It truly is boring to play the CPU while you're walking to be playing a person.

That should also cut down on some of the boosting that would obviously go on as a result. At the very least it should be counted as a partial win or something. Perhaps 1/2 of a win if the person quits in the 3rd quarter, and 3/4ths of a win if the person quits in the fourth. Although, the score should definitely be taken into account. If you're at least 30 points ahead, I'd say it's obvious who was probably going to win.

[Moostache]

The question I have is are people upset about the way the GAME plays online or the way PEOPLE play the game online?

To me, the wild card online is ALWAYS the other guy playing. If they are a straight-up player who avoids abusing the glitches and idiocy that infects the game every year, then the game online is awesome fun. If they are a douchebag though, it can kill the experience.

The best thing to do is to get involved in sites with leagues and other players who abide by some semblance of "football strategy" in its gameplay rules...

[Exonerated]

Its the people online.

They don't play straight or in the spirit of the game.

I've had some really good and fun experiences with straight gamers win or lose it doesn't matter to me.

But it is really frustrating when your playing cheesers or a 'straight gamer' that starts cheesing when he's losing in the 4th quarter.

90% of the twerps online are glitchers and cheesers and don't understand football strategy 101, it just doesn't become fun after a while.