gunslikewhoa
Member
Ranked is sbmm.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
eSports Pro hits out at Call of Duty skill based match making
- Thread starter cormack12
- Start date
Ranked is sbmm.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Agreed.
SBMM ranked lists for gamers who care about stats and tier status.
Unranked lists for anyone to jump into a mosh pit of gaming with randoms.
It doesn't seem hard to figure out. But I'm thinking there's got to be a money issue with game companies. Having two totally different algorithms for grouping gamers into different kinds of lobbies is probably some hardcore expensive programming shit they don't want to do with people and servers.
So just pick one algorithm (SBMM) and use it for all modes and playlists.
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
Game Developers...
If your game isn't fun when people of similar skill are matched with eachother... you've designed a shitty game.
I've long said Fortnite should act as an exemplar in this regard. I've had 3 minute battles against players near my skill level, lost, and loved every second of the fight.
CoD has been trash for ages.
If your game isn't fun when people of similar skill are matched with eachother... you've designed a shitty game.
I've long said Fortnite should act as an exemplar in this regard. I've had 3 minute battles against players near my skill level, lost, and loved every second of the fight.
CoD has been trash for ages.
Last edited:
rodrigolfp
Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
Is it? And unranked is not? Is it like this in R6Siege?
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Every developer will claim that for long term fun if you make lobbies skilled based where everyone is kind of the same, it makes it competitive, bad gamers don't get slaughtered, and awesome gamers don't go 25-0. It becomes more of a coin toss who wins.
It would be like a sports league saying after every season where there's a small group of great teams, tons of so-so teams, and a small group of terrible teams that teams swap players. Top teams send a good player or two to bad teams to level it out. So hopefully every team balances out as .500 team.
Maybe for the fans of the shitty teams it's good, but as a whole that's a pretty boring league if every team is the same. It's good to have some beastly teams look upon as elites who did well in drafting and coaching, and also scrubs who act like underdogs.
A key reason why devs want parity is increased micrptrans. If you are in lobbies where everyone is kind of the same, you have the itch to pay for weapons and perks hoping it gives you the edge. Until it ends it up youre just in another SBMM tier.
I wouldn't be surprised if the devs had code in their game where buying microtrans making you play a bit better has you kept in the same tier to make you feel better you are improving, but then a month later you get edged up to another tier of gamers so now your microtrans aren't valuable anymore. Then you have the urge to buy more XP points, unlockables and boosts ad repeat the cycle.
Last edited:
Kholinar
Banned
You just want to pub stomp noobs. Admit it.
farmerboy
Member
All I know is that we have a great group of guys that play together, but some of those guys are only new and not that good, and their experience is pretty iffy when we all play together. It'd be nice if the matchmaking was based off the worst in a group, or at least weighted off that.
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
I disagree.
No one wants every single player to have a 1.0 KD ratio in games. No sports league wants every team to have a .500 winning percentage.
What people do want is hope for victory and competitive games. The phrase "on any given Sunday" exists for a reason.
Sports leagues have salary caps and give poor performing teams high draft picks to provide balance.
And let's all agree that when we watch a Super Bowl... people generally all agree that it's less fun to watch when the game has been decided in the 2nd quarter.
When I played basketball, I wanted to play someone around my skill level. In fact, I'd prefer to play someone slightly better than myself. I had no interest in dominating the next door neighbor who was 8 years old. I also had little interest in playing my older brother who was 6 years my senior.
Games are most fun when all participants have a chance. If your game becomes boring or bad when that happens, your game sucks.
soulbait
Member
You missed the part where I said I agreed with him that there should be an option to opt out of skill based match making. My issue is who is complaining and why he is complaining.
Once you become a pro at something, you really shouldn't be complaining that it is too hard, especially when your profession is something that most people do for a past time. It comes across as whiny and ungrateful for the opportunity you have versus others who would love to be good enough to play and get paid for it. And that is exactly what he is doing: he is at a level where in skilled based match making it is too hard for him to just relax due to being matched with others on a same level of skill. Whining that he is unable to just relax or be able to stream these massive kill streaks as others have alluded too is a bit much, IMO.
I believe there is an argument to be made about being able to turn off skill based match making and just match with whomever that also wants to do the same, but the reasons this pro gamer brings to the table comes across as a whining child.
That's for the ranked playlist, this is a completely different story.
To be honest, I definitely agree that new and/or disabled players that just simply can't compete should have their own lobbies to make it less alienating, but the issue is that after that, it should be mostly random and purely based on connection. Call of Duty doesn't do that with SBMM. Instead, it will try and find players that are either on your level or slightly higher, and then match make you with the players on the lower end of the bracket on your team. Its absolutely infuriating and it sucks a lot of the fun when you have 20 objective points but virtually everybody else on your team has maybe 2, so its essentially just a 1 v 6. This happens all the fucking time too, so I could literally screenshot countless examples of the game matchmaking you into bad teams and expecting you to carry against a team of 6 players also on your skill level. Its just ridiculously unfun.
It also makes playing with friends miserable, I have a lot of buddies that just hate playing in lobbies with me because as soon as I join, the matches get noticeably more difficult. I believe CoD averages the skill level out so that while the lobbies come off as "easier" for me (until I go really positive, then the lobbies get on my level or harder), its much harder for my teammates. Its just an awful, unfun system, and Activision clearly wants this implemented so bad players don't quit the game and instead want to spend $$$ on the cosmetic shit they sell in game. Good players will just put up with it, so they don't care. The problem is, is that better players are starting to have enough of it, myself included. It just makes the game headache-inducing and unfun as hell. I LOVE cold war's gameplay, but unfortunately the SBMM really puts a damper on it.
Also, please shut the fuck up about this being that good players just want to stomp on bad players. That's not what its about at all. MW2 and Black Ops 2 had much less prominent SBMM, and part of the reason why those games were so fun was because you had no idea what each lobby would be like. Some lobbies would be against extremely good players, and you'd learn new things getting shit on by them. Some lobbies would be pretty even. Some lobbies would be a bunch of bots, and you'd go on crazy tears. it really felt like any lobby could be your game, and it was NEVER just "ez stomp" every single game like you'd think. In newer CODs, its literally just that you'll get shit on for a few lobbies, have one extremely good game, and then you are back to getting shit on. It's fucking dreadful.
Last edited:
BlackM1st
Banned
Nope, OW matchmaking is always skill score based. You will not earn or lose any VISIBLE POINTS , but game always knows, always tracks and always adjust your rank/matchmaking. Because of that, smurfs are all over PS Overwatch.
gioGAF
Member
He is right. As someone who isn't a pro but enjoys a good game of Call of Duty, I think it is pretty obvious that Call of Duty games subject you to a "dynamic difficulty". It makes the experience feel artificial. No progress, just the same feeling all the time. You can't "play around" and do well because you will be paired with people that are not playing around (provided you are a decent player).
It is really just a treadmill designed to keep you on for as long as possible while also pressing you with their monetization. I miss the days when this shit wasn't part of the game.
It is really just a treadmill designed to keep you on for as long as possible while also pressing you with their monetization. I miss the days when this shit wasn't part of the game.
Werewolfgrandma
Banned
So they want good players to have the ability to choose but new or bad players to just get fucked? Sounds fun for the new players.
HaveButOneLife
Banned
When a game is catered to a relaxed playstyle or to bad players in general, it's casual.
This is just an excuse for a matchmaking system that makes a game more competitive for no reason, it's horrendous and needs to be removed.
New players have to get better at the game to have fun, good players don't. SBMM negatively affects the good players but panders to bad players to sell units.
Last edited:
TKOFromTokyo
Member
I got bored locking down domination maps and fighting my teammates to get in my kill streaks. Yeah, it’s fun at first, but really boring after awhile. I have much more fun wrecking stats and beating teams in close matches. The salt is delicious.
Werewolfgrandma
Banned
I used to play very competitive cs. Every good memory of that game is from games where the other 5 were as good or better then us. We did a 250 player lan tourney and never dropped a round. It was boring and I can't remember anything about it other than winning 11-0 every single match. Maybe if the game is only fun when you are winning the game isn't actually that fun?
manfestival
Member
Yep I typically play with at least 1 friend. Otherwise playing solo is typically dreadful in these games. Though most of my friends aren't that good at the game and they get stomped cause the game will prioritize my skill over theirs. I will drop a 50 bomb while they go like 2/25. Funny enough, they tell me about their solo experiences where the game matches them into trash lobbies and they become the king of the bots lol.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
esports nerds in a nutshell:
I got 25 kills in a row. Nuke! Our team won! Check out the video!
I went 20-3. Our team won! Check out the video!
I went 13-11. Our team won, but no video to show gamers. Meh
I went 7-12. Our team still won even though I dragged the team down as one of the worst players on the team. You'll never know I played this match because I'll never tell you.
gioGAF
Member
That is his whole point, Ranked for you, Unranked for those who just want to chill.
Redlancet
Banned
because you fighted bots,cod its amazing ,be better not bitter
TKOFromTokyo
Member
Fair enough, I didn't play enough OW to know that. Regardless though, Overwatch is inherently an esport game, versus Call of Duty which is always meant to attract a more casual base. Its still not an apt comparison.
Werewolfgrandma
Banned
You don't get to chill though if you are new. My kids very first round of apex ever had him and 2 randoms die to a full squad of a prominent apex YouTube guys for first place. It could of been an awesome experience but instead it was just braap you dead. Kandys squad had like 40 of 57 possible kills. Sounds like 40 people had no fun and 3 got to have fun.
T
The New Guy
Unconfirmed Member
I've always been kind of torn on this.
I get where he's coming from, I don't think SBMM is great, but at the same time you can't expect to dominate every lobby you play in. Even as a Pro. It sometimes feel like streamers/pros aren't happy unless they're always winning. If they lose it's 'lag/cheating/unfair'. I've come across many streamers like that.
I think the best solution is to just not have SBMM in Public games, and bring League Play back like Black Ops had. Having a dedicated Ranked mode for people that want that sort of thing, with ranked rules.
I get where he's coming from, I don't think SBMM is great, but at the same time you can't expect to dominate every lobby you play in. Even as a Pro. It sometimes feel like streamers/pros aren't happy unless they're always winning. If they lose it's 'lag/cheating/unfair'. I've come across many streamers like that.
I think the best solution is to just not have SBMM in Public games, and bring League Play back like Black Ops had. Having a dedicated Ranked mode for people that want that sort of thing, with ranked rules.
Explosive Zombie
Banned
I feel like I'm getting off topic a bit but the real problem is these games aren't hard enough outside of MP. When a high skill competitive player talks about just wanting to unwind they don't usually mean easily destroying everything in sight, others have said that gets boring and it does but I think what they really want is a middle ground between absolute sweaty bs and stomping everyone into oblivion and I feel like there was a time when playing a campaign mode on hard could present that level of challenge.
I'll use Destiny as an example... because I like Destiny... In D1 Nightfalls, Raids and Trials/IB/comp were all high stress enough that regular modes were like unwinding. In D2 (largely) the Raids and Nightfalls aren't quite as hard or challenging as they were in D1 but Trials and Comp are sweaty as fuck, even IB can be because of how many people play as six stacks and shit, with skill-based matchmaking there's no real unwind, though, regular Crucible is play the meta or be annoyed and in D1 you could unwind doing heroic strikes but in D2 heroic strikes are so easy they're too boring, the latest Raid went a few days before people were solo'ing certain bosses nevermind that with raids the real difficulty has always been can I get teammates who don't suck? My actual unwind mode in D2 has become Gambit which is a mix of PVP and PVE, Gambit gets complained about a lot because most matches are either you stomp them or they stomp you, I stick with Gambit Prime because the catch-up mechanic simulates a competitive feel even in stomp matches, it's such a neat balance between unwinding and occasionally sweating if you want to, there's way more room to experiment with random weapons and builds and shit while still feeling pushed occasionally for doing so.
People keep talking about the noob experience but you know what... when does the noob stop being a noob? I still remember my days playing Counter-Strike beta and what it felt like to get annihilated on the regular. You think that made me turn the game off and stop playing? You think I needed some SBMM to match me against shitty players? You think I needed random killstreak BS or super powers to up my k/d? No, the fun was in trying to become better and over time I actually felt like I did. The current way things are it's like everyone is hitting their glass ceiling so fast and never gets a true sense of progress as a result. Some people might love this, every match feels moderately competitive for them but what about when you push into the next tier and the next tier is full of people USED TO that tier of gaming and you're new to it, you don't just get squashed, but you do, but you then end up BACK to your tier, if you were STUCK in that new tier you'd force yourself to get better but a noob never has to force themself to get better in most of these games.
Basically, it should be an uphill battle for noobs, there should be options for people who are great if they don't want to constantly sweat and even for noobs... make campaign/sp/co-op modes ACTUALLY DIFFICULTY AGAIN so there's something for all of us to "unwind" with without being mind numbingly easy. It sounds like I'm asking a lot with this balancing act but games used to be like this, D1 vs D2, old Halo entries, Crysis (to be fair I never got into the MP component), even Battlefield had a few games with decent campaigns (the two Bad Company games), maybe this one is nostalgia but I recall Call of Duty 2 as being the last Call of Duty to have effort put into the campaign experience beyond simply making it cinematic and of course there was Half-Life with its soldier AI. More examples I'm not thinking of but we were in a pretty sweet golden age of shooters and nowadays it feels like it's ALL about competitive play with shooters with very few attempting to give us a fun, challenging campaign besides indie titles. I've never felt so lost on what to play, I'm sitting here playing Ass Creed Origins because I can't think of a shooter worth my time lately.
I'll use Destiny as an example... because I like Destiny... In D1 Nightfalls, Raids and Trials/IB/comp were all high stress enough that regular modes were like unwinding. In D2 (largely) the Raids and Nightfalls aren't quite as hard or challenging as they were in D1 but Trials and Comp are sweaty as fuck, even IB can be because of how many people play as six stacks and shit, with skill-based matchmaking there's no real unwind, though, regular Crucible is play the meta or be annoyed and in D1 you could unwind doing heroic strikes but in D2 heroic strikes are so easy they're too boring, the latest Raid went a few days before people were solo'ing certain bosses nevermind that with raids the real difficulty has always been can I get teammates who don't suck? My actual unwind mode in D2 has become Gambit which is a mix of PVP and PVE, Gambit gets complained about a lot because most matches are either you stomp them or they stomp you, I stick with Gambit Prime because the catch-up mechanic simulates a competitive feel even in stomp matches, it's such a neat balance between unwinding and occasionally sweating if you want to, there's way more room to experiment with random weapons and builds and shit while still feeling pushed occasionally for doing so.
People keep talking about the noob experience but you know what... when does the noob stop being a noob? I still remember my days playing Counter-Strike beta and what it felt like to get annihilated on the regular. You think that made me turn the game off and stop playing? You think I needed some SBMM to match me against shitty players? You think I needed random killstreak BS or super powers to up my k/d? No, the fun was in trying to become better and over time I actually felt like I did. The current way things are it's like everyone is hitting their glass ceiling so fast and never gets a true sense of progress as a result. Some people might love this, every match feels moderately competitive for them but what about when you push into the next tier and the next tier is full of people USED TO that tier of gaming and you're new to it, you don't just get squashed, but you do, but you then end up BACK to your tier, if you were STUCK in that new tier you'd force yourself to get better but a noob never has to force themself to get better in most of these games.
Basically, it should be an uphill battle for noobs, there should be options for people who are great if they don't want to constantly sweat and even for noobs... make campaign/sp/co-op modes ACTUALLY DIFFICULTY AGAIN so there's something for all of us to "unwind" with without being mind numbingly easy. It sounds like I'm asking a lot with this balancing act but games used to be like this, D1 vs D2, old Halo entries, Crysis (to be fair I never got into the MP component), even Battlefield had a few games with decent campaigns (the two Bad Company games), maybe this one is nostalgia but I recall Call of Duty 2 as being the last Call of Duty to have effort put into the campaign experience beyond simply making it cinematic and of course there was Half-Life with its soldier AI. More examples I'm not thinking of but we were in a pretty sweet golden age of shooters and nowadays it feels like it's ALL about competitive play with shooters with very few attempting to give us a fun, challenging campaign besides indie titles. I've never felt so lost on what to play, I'm sitting here playing Ass Creed Origins because I can't think of a shooter worth my time lately.
Bitmap Frogs
Mr. Community
I don't want to sweat is code for "I want easy killstreaks on 6 years old to make me look good on youtube'
Fuck them.
Fuck them.
rodrigolfp
Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
Casuality has nothing to do with dificulty of the game.
Last edited:
nyr88nyg
Banned
Want a tissue?
nyr88nyg
Banned
I’m no big cod fan but lol at thinking fart nite is good
nyr88nyg
Banned
Play
Play single player on easy if you want to chill
Ozzy Onya A2Z
Member
I have to agree, casual should really just be random match ups. In Australia we get razor focus with skill based matchmaking and essentially you get to a false ceiling where you're bested by the same players and teams over and over. You don't go up or down at that point, it's endless games of the same outcomes and sweatiness. Ranked playlists absolutely should have skill based matchmaking. Casual playlists should have a very wide margin of skill matching, if at all and healthy doses of party/squad matching. I'd prefer random skill with full party matching as much as possible for casual/social playlists in any game.
We run into this exact issue since Halo 2 days, H3, H4, H5, Apex, Overwatch and so many more. He's right, you don't always want to play a sweaty game e.g. what if it's your first game of the night? You're bang in the middle of the top tier play and not warmed up etc.
We run into this exact issue since Halo 2 days, H3, H4, H5, Apex, Overwatch and so many more. He's right, you don't always want to play a sweaty game e.g. what if it's your first game of the night? You're bang in the middle of the top tier play and not warmed up etc.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
If you're a "pro" and complain about this kind of thing, I lose some respect for you. I think there are legitimate gripes in that criticism, but those are grievances that normies should have, not "pros".
Why don't we lump in division II college football to the NFL while we're at it.
Get good, scrub.
Why don't we lump in division II college football to the NFL while we're at it.
Get good, scrub.
KURDISTAN YPG
Member
Keep on crying, nothing is fun when money is involved, Glad they did this, i never like cod ganes, in my opinion it ruin every shooter out there
“ xp xp xp headshot xp xp xp “
bring socom back n play reall fkn skill game
“ xp xp xp headshot xp xp xp “
bring socom back n play reall fkn skill game
Mitsuda Maniac
Member
Harry Potter needs to STFU and just play
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
It is if you view games based on their mechanics. Just broke it's concurrent players record a couple days ago for a reason.
diffusionx
Gold Member
A COD pro is tired after spending 9 hours of doing the thing he is paid to do.
imagine that GAF, being tired after a day of work. Incomprehensible. Truly something that Activision needs to fix.
Last edited:
Joshmyersbv
Member
A lot of these CoD pros are pissed because they stomped randoms in lobbies with no SBMM carrying +6 KDs and now they get paired with players in the same skill set and barely carry +2 KDs.
MrFunSocks
Banned
Maybe I'm not understanding this right...................the guy is supposedly a "world champion" of COD, spends 9+ hours a day playing it online, and is now complaining that he's getting matched with good players and can't just steamroll bad players all day to make himself look good on stream?
Is that right? He's upset that he is now losing because he's actually playing people that are the same skill level or better than him?
being on the better side of the bell curve, when they added SBMM it started taking forever for me to find a match. They seem to have backed it off now because I’m seeing a lot of just plain bad players haha.
Is that right? He's upset that he is now losing because he's actually playing people that are the same skill level or better than him?
That was one of the things I loved most about PUBG before they went and added shitty SBMM - it was just 100 random players chucked in a match, and just like in real life, anyone can beat anyone at any time because of a number of factors. I could be the best player in the world but that doesn't matter if someone who's on their second ever game gets a good headshot from 200m away with a sniper rifle and 1 hit kills me.
being on the better side of the bell curve, when they added SBMM it started taking forever for me to find a match. They seem to have backed it off now because I’m seeing a lot of just plain bad players haha.
Last edited:
FeldMonster
Member
What if it's your first game of the night? Are you serious? Did you really just write all that?
Umm, maybe you lose the match, and then move on with your life? You might even, heaven forbid, drop in rank. [The horror!] And then you might play another match with slightly easier opponents. Wow! What a concept. /s
You are complaining about hitting a ceiling where your rank neither increases no decreases. Perhaps the game figured out your skill level and put you exactly where you belong.
Batiman
Banned
What a bitch. This was also a issue with Halo5 IMO. Well not really an issue if you seek out competitive gaming. But I wasn’t wired to the TV I’d get my ass handed to me. But that’s the way it should be. But there’s a lot more skill involved in halo and less random “whoever sees who first gets the kill” bullshit. If your crap in halo you probably won’t get one kill on me besides maybe a grenade or a kill steal. My 8 year old niece could play a COD game and walk alway with easy kills against one of these “pros”
Ozzy Onya A2Z
Member
For ranked I have no issue with that. For casual I'm not after always competing at my top level. This also fluctuates based on who I play with, for example one of my regular mates in Apex is a top tier player and another mate is bronze through and through. Trouble is we all play together, so squad matching puts us against regular squads and skill matching puts us in games where we're outclassed. Is that what I/we want or deserve from casual/social play game after game?
Population pools in various skill segments as well as regional numbers of players at a given time affect these systems heavily. In casual it can skew due to those factors, trap you/your team in unwinnable games even. I'm all for taking a loss and I really don't get mad at video games etc. My example above is just one, you don't need to be so literal. There are more examples, what if I've been drinking or I'm having a game with my kids for a laugh etc. They deserve my skill matching in casual based on my gamertag do they?
There is a reason games split ranked and social. It should have a larger variation than it does and the higher you rank or further away from the larger population pools, speaking regionally/internationally, the issues are magnified and more impacting per player/squad. Each person has a different experience but the people I play with regularly, and have done for 10+ years, all agree with similar to what the pro is saying here. We've seen implementations of many varieties where developers are trying to tweak these systems based on these factors. It's a balancing act.
I agree with the pro here, a much wider skill match or random approach is more enjoyable overall for casual/social. By your own logic isn't it fun to see top tier players and learn from them some games? A strict matchmaking system locks low tier players from ever playing against top tier players/squads.
In reality what occurs is smurf accounts, so the system becomes totally broken anyhow. It's been an evolution from griefers, teamers, derankers, quitters, cheaters etc and it's far from perfect still. To be clear I don't care about rank at all, what I care about is a fun or fair experience when I play. Strict skill matching on paper works more effectively to delivery quality game experiences per game. However when you look over the variations of playing casually and a long period of time the wider skill matching or random matching approaches surpass the stricter systems. This is why I agree with the pro.
As for ranked play, the stricter the better as far as populations and search times are considered.
Last edited:
Roni
Gold Member
Somewhere in your post you've just described a proto drafting system where the wealthy teams don't automatically dominate and there's no point for a tournament anymore.
If the game is fun, then playing should be fun. Winning or losing.
If you only have fun mostly winning, that's cool: you should earn that amongst your peers, not your inferiors.
Then just suck until they put you in lobbies more your level..... noob.
Last edited:
Casanova
Member
They just want easy killstreak vids to put on youtube and make money off of it. I can see why they're complaining, but hiding under the guise of "I don't want to sweat" is pathetic for a "Pro". Just call it what it is. They want to shit on normies and make money off of the content they get from doing it.
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Exactly.
What these pro gamers want to do is jump into a random lobby of crappy players, dominate, and upload a video by 10 am. Then they are done for the day.
If these bums have to sweat it in hard lobbies, they'll be forced to play all day, including quitting matches and doing it over, since these kinds of gamers only upload their good matches.
I can see their frustration. They are self proclaimed great gamers, yet join a lobby of non-pro gamers (beer dads after dinner or young guys with spare time at noon) who turn out to be just as good as they are. They can barely eek out a KD higher than 1.00 and lose 50% of the time. So they feel like shit and last resort is to beg for no SBMM.
Probably there all day hoping one of their SBMM matches is worth uploading.
RetroRibosome
Member
Eh I noticed a definite decrease in getting dropped into 30-3 matches where there are already several kill streaks in the air as pubstompers farm bot-tier players. 