Well, to be fair, it's all contextual isn't it.
If a player clearly has no mathematical possibility to win and their actions cannot affect the game for other players, i.e. it's a two-player game, or it is impossible for anybody except for one player to win, then it's reasonable that the players should discuss this and can come to a resolution among themselves.
I have done that in real table games with two players where I have information my opponent does not have and have even said, "I can reach only 19 points so if you can get to 20 let's call it a win in your favour and begin again." This is so that we can both get more games in rather than having a long round where the conclusion is already known.
It depends a lot on why you are PLAYING games. I PLAY for fun, and to enjoy other people's company or to enjoy the game. I don't PLAY purely to have a win. I want to win, sure, but that's not the only reason to play. So if I am losing or likely to lose that does not dictate to me whether I am enjoying the game or not.
Especially in multiplayer games and here on BGA games are not handled particularly well when players abandon a game. You don't get a clearcut winner. There is no point in playing a game if everytime one person is falling behind they will leave the game.
There are so many situations where different outcomes are sensible, really, but in general there should be a very good reason for abandoning a game that you committed to playing with other people, having expected them to also committed to spend their time with you.
Ultimately it comes down to who you are and who you're playing with and how you enjoy games. For me, it isn't a big deal to ask someone to complete their turns in a game they chose to play, especially if leaving the game early is because they have a lower chance of winning or if their choice to leave affects more than one person.
If a player clearly has no mathematical possibility to win and their actions cannot affect the game for other players, i.e. it's a two-player game, or it is impossible for anybody except for one player to win, then it's reasonable that the players should discuss this and can come to a resolution among themselves.
I have done that in real table games with two players where I have information my opponent does not have and have even said, "I can reach only 19 points so if you can get to 20 let's call it a win in your favour and begin again." This is so that we can both get more games in rather than having a long round where the conclusion is already known.
It depends a lot on why you are PLAYING games. I PLAY for fun, and to enjoy other people's company or to enjoy the game. I don't PLAY purely to have a win. I want to win, sure, but that's not the only reason to play. So if I am losing or likely to lose that does not dictate to me whether I am enjoying the game or not.
Especially in multiplayer games and here on BGA games are not handled particularly well when players abandon a game. You don't get a clearcut winner. There is no point in playing a game if everytime one person is falling behind they will leave the game.
There are so many situations where different outcomes are sensible, really, but in general there should be a very good reason for abandoning a game that you committed to playing with other people, having expected them to also committed to spend their time with you.
Ultimately it comes down to who you are and who you're playing with and how you enjoy games. For me, it isn't a big deal to ask someone to complete their turns in a game they chose to play, especially if leaving the game early is because they have a lower chance of winning or if their choice to leave affects more than one person.