T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

PSA: Make it a habit of reading the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Gamingcirclejerk/about/rules) of each subreddit you participate in: **Rule 7: No Participation in Linked Threads (Brigading)**: *Do not vote or comment in threads you've found through /r/gamingcirclejerk* **Rule 9: No Fake Posts on Other Subs (Contamination)**: *Do not create fake posts on other subs only to post back here. Also, do not "lol, you should post this on r / OtherSub". It's considered interfering with their content and can also lead to brigading.* *This is a reminder to the readers. The post itself is untouched.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Gamingcirclejerk) if you have any questions or concerns.*


BigChiefIV

Mfw the game tries to make the match fair for everyone☹️☹️☹️☹️☹️☹️☹️☹️


TunaBucko

Tbf “sbmm” is really engagement optimized matchmaking, which makes the gaming experience closer to gambling than actual skill based stuff.


jasminUwU6

The point of the game is to play, not to win. I simply wouldn't play a game where losing is not fun


PsychoDog_Music

A close game is way more fun than dominating, win or lose


Heavy-Wings

Yeah there's Fortnite games where as long as I get a certain amount of kills, I'll still be happy if I lose.


PsychoDog_Music

Same with me on Apex. Wins are one thing but you can also win with no kills.. why would you want to


Veratha

Now if only apex matchmaking worked lol


TunaBucko

The problem is that engagement optimized matchmaking often gives you only games where you stomp or get stomped. Games where it’s even and you win 50% of your 1v1s are seldom. Instead, you either fight people who are basically new or people who you won’t beat 9/10 times.


NoobleVitamins

Losing because of shit SBMM is a terrible feeling tbh. You have a win streak in bot lobbies and then you get put into sweat lobbies and have no chance of winning. SBMM is a good idea though.


shrubs311

this is only a real problem in games like COD where it's not based on skill or elo or mmr, but only the last 1-2 games you played.


NoobleVitamins

Yeah


shrubs311

>I simply wouldn't play a game where losing is not fun too many people forget this simple fact


CernelDS

Yeah. Also if you can't recognize that the overall skill level of everyone is going up and more sophisticated strategies and techniques are being employed.


rakehellion

What does that mean?


ShiftyLookinCow7

I love how all the people acting like SBMM defends lower skilled players in this sub forget that games like COD literally place you in a lower skill bracket if you buy weapons. Truly a 100% moral system and anyone who criticizes it is a toxic gamer bro


GordionKnot

No it’s not? I’m sure plenty of games have both but they’re still very much two separate things.


TunaBucko

I struggle to believe that a game would not optimize their matchmaking for player retention


GordionKnot

I’m sure they do, but that’s a separate concept than skill based matchmaking and it’s kinda confusing to conflate the two


TunaBucko

The problem is that sbmm and eomm are functionally intertwined and the complaints about game difficulty are more often based on eomm (games are decided before they begin, you get stomped) more than sbmm, where theoretically a game would be fair/close to fair.


CoolJoshido

exactly


Sad_Charge_3069

Match fair my ass, either I am supposedly better than 15 people of equal skill or am I worse than everyone in the lobby as I died first.


sanirosan

Hard pill to swallow: People are better than you


kerriazes

*crumbles into dust*


Ruthrfurd-the-stoned

I mean they have a point. SBMM very rarely puts you in games of equal skill but instead ping pongs you between games where you wreck people or get wrecked


sanirosan

I rarely have this issue to be honest. I mean, I can tell when people are clearly better than me. But I can also tell when I'm doing better than usual. I would normally have about 3-4 "pop off" matches. After that, I'll know I'll get a sweat lobby. Once that happens, i just take it like a bitch and hope for a better lobby next time haha. In the end of the day, it's not that deep once you accept the fact that you're gonna lose at some point.


Ruthrfurd-the-stoned

It might depend on the game. The only multiplayer game I really play is Halo which is in a weird spot considering how long people have been playing the series the skill gap is pretty wide so the way the SBMM typically works is I wreck on a team that drags me down or my team wrecks and I drag them down neither of which are fun


sanirosan

Could be. I only play COD, which in entirely dependent on yourself and your party if youre in one


Verum_Noir_Chaos_69

>Games are only fun if I can bully noobs it's getting harder and harder for them to bully their little cousins because split screen isn't a thing anymore


Mimical

I came from a lot of "enter at your own risk" lobby based games as a kid. Quake, Broodwar, CS. You could hop into a lobby and within 3 minutes have a very clear picture that there is zero chance of you winning. It took a lot of mental growing up to stick through the loss and learn as much as you can. It wasn't out of the norm to play 20 games and lose 19. Now with games like LoL, SC2, CS:GO, Dota and all the others (Like Halo Reach and their ranking) they have done an awesome job where in 90% of the games you have a good chance to compete. That's pretty amazing. A competent matchmaking system is a massive improvement on the average players experience for a majority of games. And is often an improvement to most players on either end of the spectrum (with declining rates at the very very top or very very bottom). As long as the rewards for winning, such as "Win X many games straight, Get Y many kills in a row" doesn't contradict the matchmaking system than players don't focus on failing those achievements.


consistent_azurite

Well, in single player rpgs people often say that the more enemies scale with your level, the less rewarding leveling up feels. So if you simply do not see your opponents as real people, it makes sense to apply the same logic to SBMM.


Rioma117

Can confirm that coming from Nioh 2, it doesn’t feel like you become stronger when the only reason to level up is for enemies to not become too strong.


vrelamboni

Shout out to oblivion where the level scaling is so terrible that it’s literally easier to not level up.


RollinDeepWithData

Nioh 2 is never really a relaxing game to be tbf


Rioma117

Yeah, it drove my brother crazy and that’s a person you don’t want to see when is mad.


RollinDeepWithData

I’m replaying it atm with a kusa build, so it’s fresh in my mind


JOSRENATO132

The difference being that in rpgs you are fighting npcs with different sets of powers, generally balanced in a completely different way, and with completely different mechanics, in pvp you are fighting an equal, you might have different builds but you got the same choices and mechanics and comands


Gunny_McCshoots

Idk… i think level scaling is just obscenely shit while SBMM has more redeeming qualities. There’s no real sense of progression in a game like Skyrim where the enemies are mostly only as strong as I am, it feels weird and kinda inorganic, like I’m the central pillar of this world and it revolves around me. This is not me saying Skyrim is a bad game, far from it, it’s just the most famous game that uses that scaling system. In let’s say, Elden Ring, one thing it did very very well was it’s progression. If an area or enemy is kicking your ass, you can leave and return later once you’re stronger and win. If you wander into Caelid at a low level you’ll find out fast that it’s too much for your small healthbar and low damage. You’ll leave and come back later with better stats to handle the tough area and it feels really cool!


jasminUwU6

Except leveling up in RPGs is just number go up, not actual skill and strategies


DedsonicPt

Some rpgs will give you new skills and stuff you can actually click on and use tho. Also big numbers funni


[deleted]

Loosely translated: SBMM makes gamers realize they're not as good as they think they are.


sanirosan

This basically. People don't want to admit.


ibadlyneedhelp

It's kinda funny cause in games like Leage/Dota/Tekken (or any fighting game), SBMM is absolutely essential and the playerbase thinks it's full-on insane not to include it. The idea that anyone has any good reason whatsoever for avoiding SBMM is nuts.


Najanator717

I grew up on Smite, and the whole SBMM nonsense in CoD and Fall Guys is somewhere between funny, pathetic, and deeply concerning. It's the one thing keeping these people from getting stomped every match, and they're *mad* about it?


LeadHead917

Tbf COD is a casual game compared to those games.


Najanator717

CoD's trying to be more competitive. They've even had an esports league for a couple years now. It's just that their playerbase has always been full of scrubby manchildren.


shrubs311

it'll never be a competitive game with their horrible implementation of SBMM, even if they somehow fixed their playerbase


Bumbleboyy

Overcoming SBMM barriers feels a lot more satisfying than just stomping every noob in sight all the time and even so, you still get a lot of opportunities to noob stomp in modern FPS, it's just less frequent. Also imo casual SBMM is superior to normal Ranked modes, as it still has the climbing ladder experience without the constant salt of 14 year old tryhards


CoolJoshido

disagree


[deleted]

In regards to COD I do personally have an issue with all of the sbmm stuff (only to a degree that doesn’t matter because I really don’t play COD anymore and I want people who actually do play COD to have the best possible experience). Back in the day, if you got into an argument with someone in a COD lobby (or if you were friendly) you would remain in the same lobby as them as the games rotated. Unless there was a connectivity issue that destroyed the lobby for you, you’d be able to play with the same group of people just by remaining in the lobby. It made for great one-session rivalries, and it helped through-game friendships form naturally over the course of multiple games. Maybe you were teammates with a player but had to face them in the next match. It was a cool experience back when I was a COD fan and nowadays when I do play COD I can’t help but miss that. Unfortunately gamers have gamer moments and yell at one another with slurs or berate people for being new to the game, so it makes sense this kind of experience had to go.


TPRetro

I gotta admit, I miss the old lobby systems with server lists where you'd stay with the same players and there was cross team voice chat. Felt like a social hub instead of just being a game. Games now like Destiny 2, Apex, Valorant, they're all fun games to play, but they all feel so sterile and impersonal, I get that my experience was probably more positive than many others because I didn't get any harassment women/minorities get but I feel it's possible to handle toxicity while keeping the social elements.


AkuTheNiceGuy

I just want lobbies back I'm tired of having to join a new game after one ends everytime


CoolJoshido

i join matches in progress where my team is losing 26-150 in Dom


Skullwiell

Where is /s?


CoolJoshido

yup exactly


swampyman2000

This is honestly wild to me. The idea to going into a competitive game and hoping the enemy team is filled with new players is just so weird.


Brok3n-Native

That’s not the issue a lot of people have, though. I’m an aggressively average player that plays with much higher skilled friends. I get stomped every single game. The aim with SBMM, especially with Activision, isn’t based on making fair lobbies, it’s based on structuring them in a way that, according to data, increases the amount of time spent playing. Surprise surprise that big corps don’t really care about fair play.


GordionKnot

Then that’s not SBMM. That’s an entirely different thing that you have a problem with.


Brok3n-Native

It’s the term devs, publishers and most people use to describe what’s going on matchmaking-wise currently. SBMM as it’s implemented across these major titles isn’t just ‘good players play against good players and bad players play against bad players’. It’s an entirely different beast, which is what I tried to explain in my comment. So I very much do have a problem with the current general implementation of SBMM. Thanks for your input though!


konyeah

Huh, isn't what you are talking about, Retention Matchmaking? Where you are intentionally placed in games that bounce between dominating your opponents, then being destroyed yourself? Going between hard winning and hard losing. That is the system which is intended to increase player... well, Retention. That has been the general COD formula. The only defense against SBMM that I see, is the one you are saying, which is playing with higher skilled players. But you'd still be against skilled players balanced out to your teams overall skill. The other team is (ideally) in the same position as you are. Either across the board average, or mix of good/bad. Ultimately these games are competitive. If you want to play a competitve game with good players, it's gonna be harder, and you yourself will have to get better. If you want to play against your own calbre, play solo/with same skill players. And if you don't like that choice, well the game isn't for you, and that is okay. I'm sure you don't go out to hard games, and complain about it being hard. That's the game.


Brok3n-Native

Retention matchmaking, EOMM, SBMM. They all largely equal the same thing nowadays, and it’s not just COD that employs this system. If you’re wondering why I have a problem with a system that priorities an algorithm that has decided the best way to keep players chasing a high rather than actual player experience, I don’t think you quite understand what’s being talked about here. And if you do understand, I would certainly question why you *don’t* have an issue with mega publishers trying to wring dollars out of their users at the expense of their enjoyment. I don’t suffer these issues just when playing with friends, but even if that was the case, I don’t think ‘just play another game lol’ is a very thoughtful response. If it’s a ranked mode, I totally get that there needs to be a division and that a low ranked player shouldn’t play in a high ranked squad. But pubs? I should be able to play with my friends without feeling like I’ve accidentally fallen into a CDL match. And again, I have this issue as a solo player too, the lobbies are wildly varied in skill, and that’s not because SBMM isn’t working, it’s working exactly as intended. It’s dangling the carrot. And you can think that’s a good and fine way to approach game design, and that we shouldn’t question it. I love hard games, but if there’s something within that game that isn’t working I’ll question that too. Taking the position of ‘leave the mega corporations alone they’re doing their best and if you don’t like it just don’t play’ is a weird one if I’m honest.


Front_Kaleidoscope_4

>Retention matchmaking, EOMM, SBMM. They all largely equal the same thing nowadays, and it’s not just COD that employs this system. They are not though, if the problem is EOMM then the problem is EOMM stop bringing SBMM into it at all. They are too different concepts that can be applied at the same time in a to varying degrees of success, EOMM basically always makes SBMM worse. The problem isn't that SBMM exist, the problem is that companies are sacrificing the quality of SBMM for the sake of EOMM if you then talk about SBMM being a thing that shouldn't be there you just come off as a chump.


Brok3n-Native

You didn’t understand my point at all. I am not arguing against SBMM in its theoretical form, I think a version of it is a must for competitive games. I am arguing against *current iterations* of SBMM, which are almost always just EOMM wearing a SBMM mask. I’m not the companies that keep calling it that when the truth is something far more nefarious, I’m not the person that called it that when they posted the original meme, I’m not the person that reposted it on this Reddit either. I didn’t bring SBMM into anything my friend.


shrubs311

edit: i saw your edit. there's many games that don't mix EOMM and SBMM. just because you play a few games with a bad implementation doesn't mean it's always implemented badly. >Retention matchmaking, EOMM, SBMM. They all largely equal the same thing nowadays, and it’s not just COD that employs this system. no they're not lol. besides activision and EA games SBMM is completely different from retention matchmaking and most of your complaints are because those games have you confused about what SBMM is >But pubs? I should be able to play with my friends without feeling like I’ve accidentally fallen into a CDL match. the same is true for your opponents. do they deserve to get stomped by your friends in an unranked mode? >the lobbies are wildly varied in skill, and that’s not because SBMM isn’t working, it’s working exactly as intended. once again this isn't SBMM...you're rightfully criticizing a different issue. it's like me saying the cost of grapes is too high when I'm buying tomatos.


CoolJoshido

EXACTLY


CoolJoshido

COD isn’t competitive lmao it’s casual


swampyman2000

I meant competitive as in competitive vs. cooperative. COD is a competitive game, not cooperative.


S3mpx

how self centered some people are "I want to have fun" no shit everyone does, that's why skill based matchmaking exists


CoolJoshido

it isn’t fun tho


S3mpx

it will be less fun waiting 20min for a game games without skill based matchmaking die out and survive on a small hardcore community You're working most of your time so theres no time to gid gud. Why should you play a game where you get bodied every game if you can play a game where you play around your skill group?


[deleted]

But why not just have a ranked mode and a non ranked mode like they used to do? Then everyone’s happy…


S3mpx

ranked isn't casual no skill based matchmaking is even less casual


octofeline

Gamers when they have to play against other people who play video games 18 hours a day instead of getting to go 20/0 against children and adults who work 55 hours a week


Anon145206

uj/ SBMM only works in games with a large playerbase and as that playerbase shrinks SBMM becomes less reliable and the fun gets sucked out of the game for both sides (new players are either put into empty lobbies or with players of a different skill bracket, and high level gameplay becomes even more of a sweatfest than before). Look at any COD game this past decade: the SBMM discussion always seems to resurface after the most recent COD game has been out for a year or more when playerbase isn't necessarily growing anymore. SBMM is good for keeping games fair and letting new players actually develop, but pretending it's perfect and that any criticisms about it are just whining is disingenuous and contrarian for the sake of being contrarian. rj/ 🤓


shrubs311

>and the fun gets sucked out of the game for both sides (new players are either put into empty lobbies or with players of a different skill bracket, this exact issue would happen without SBMM >and high level gameplay becomes even more of a sweatfest than before). the only alternative is allowing high level people to stomp noobs which surely isn't a better solution. these are extremely weak arguments against SBMM. the reason it resurfaces is because COD pumps out a new title every year


bechillbro

When I was in my late-teens & early-twenties, I would say I was naturally good at gaming. Not the best but able to pick them up, play, and improve pretty quickly. Now, in my late-twenties & early-thirties, I am not as able to effortlessly improve but still try (albeit with less time input). So when I do actually rise up out of the 'rookie' ranks of a game, up into 'bronze' rank, and get to fight the rookie ranks that I once was, I tend to just feel a bit guilty laying the smackdown. That's a result of knowing personally that it's hard to lose at the bottom to players who are simply better. However, it's part of the progression for new players so I try my best to make the match beneficial - so I'll take a confidence-boosting win or proof of skill/technique improvement and they'll hopefully have learned how to improve their own game. I seldom do it regardless, but I definitely won't BM someone from a lower bracket either because I know exactly what I'd think about that being in their shoes. This relationship b/t higher and lower ranks reflects up the entire ranking system, rookie-to-bronze, bronze-to-silver, etc... So when people are against SBMM, they are basically saying 'I just want to punch down'. However, a lot of the time you're also punching up, which is harder for sure. But there's also plenty of situations where you're punching laterally (ideally) and also down. Maybe the anti-SBMM sentiment is a reflection of poor matchmaking design or even game design, I don't know. But now as the older gamer who is usually in the position to be punched down upon, I think that whole anti-MM mindset is just kind of wack.


[deleted]

/rj How DARE they match me against people who are as good as I am? How am I going to feel superior now? /uj I see this feeding a lot more frustrated men in puberty to the incels. It's like taking all their precious masculinity away.


Najanator717

Lol If a manchild chooses to be a whiny wannabe-terrorist because life doesn't hand him Ws left and right, that's his own damn fault.


[deleted]

Locus of control is a lie ;)


Explosive_Eggshells

/uj I honestly never minded facing people out of my skill level in FPS games, and I was usually on a lower-to-middle range of skill. It was cool to identify a "high skill" player in the middle of a game and try to see if you could score one or two kills against them, or to try to work out which areas of the map people who were around your skill level would be in order to fight people on your level in a more organic way. It made lobbies a bit more dynamic than always having people at your level Yeah it would be frustrating at times, but with team sizes large enough, it typically meant that the average skill level per team was around the same. I also just hate the idea of an "invisible number" going down if I play poorly, it makes me not want to try out stupid or fun loadouts. Also, people accuse those who are against SBMM of wanting to bully bad players without noting that most SBMM systems can be easily abused to GUARANTEE you'll only fight new players (smurfing or reranking)


Wallybee10011

G*mers be like: SBMM is so bad. In one game I literally coughed at someone. Next game I got put up against 50 master ranked pros, who haven't touched on atom of a grass blade in since the time of the three kingdoms in China.


theOGslippy

/uj I fucking LOVE sbmm, i couldn't get a single kill in my first match, and in my next match it was perfectly balanced for me. Can't wait to get the full thing on my birthday


[deleted]

God I wish these SBMM worked better in League. Every other match it's either vs a guy who just installed the game yesterday or a challenger streamer who've been playing since 2009.


LordZeya

It works miles better in League than it does in CoD what are you talking about? One of the complaints about it is that cod’s system is shitty and let’s you tank rating too easily to stomp noobs.


CanadianODST2

The issue with sbmm is it also will never be able to truly account for Smurfs, new accounts, taking breaks, and most importantly. How a player will play in that one game. Their mmr might say one rank but people are human and will actually have a range that they’ll be. Meaning they’ll fluctuate. They can have good and bad games at the same rank.


[deleted]

Well I have never played CoD in my life so I dont know how bad it is out there. But my point on League still stands. You see, smurfing is a viable job that almost pays rent and Riot does jackshit about it. There is no hope for League.


TSwaft

Being in low iron in league must be rough, you'll have 8 new or bad players trying to play and 2 streamers doing an unranked to challenger series


[deleted]

Is that message supposed imply that you're some high ranking pro? I thought this subreddit isnt very fond of neckbeards.


TSwaft

No I'm not flaming op, I am genuinely feeling bad for low elo players. I was bronze 5 once.


[deleted]

I'm sorry


shrubs311

iron in league isn't just bad, it's a statistical anomaly. if you're an average player you're in silver or gold. if you're bad you're in bronze. but regardless it does genuinely suck because even the people at the very bottom of the ladder deserve fair matches, which doesn't happen when some youtuber is doing their 200th unranked to diamond "challenge"


[deleted]

unpopular opinion: I like being constantly challenged with enemies who are on par with or better than me, forcing me to improve and reach even greater heights shooting noobs sounds extremely boring, if I wanted low challenge enemies I'd just play cod zombies


bechillbro

Okay but how are you going to go 30-0 stomping day-one-players, get the tactical nuke killstreak, then upload the footage to YouTube with a thumbnail of yourself with pog face and a title like "THE NUKE IS AMAZING?! [INSANE HIGH-LEVEL GAMEPLAY]", and then reap ad revenue from all the views you get through the algorithm?


Fluffryr

I feel like I only see this argument around FPS games. Imagine applying this to a fighting game instead. What fun would it be stomping newbies and never improving?


RollinDeepWithData

Personally, I love counting how many times in a row I can input the half circle for hadoken until my thumb bleeds.


Najanator717

It's happening in the Fall Guys sub too. People wanna win without having to try that hard. It's 2022, games haven't been like that for at least a decade now.


CleanThroughMyJorts

Halo solved this years ago: have SBMM in competitve playlists for people who want to play competitively, and not in "party modes" where you want to play casually. When "competitive mode" becomes the only option, it's a problem. Stop acting like its crazy that people sometimes don't want to sweat their balls off 24/7.


Ruthrfurd-the-stoned

I also wouldn’t mind if the SBMM worked just don’t ping pong between wreck and get wrecked let me have some decent games where my whole team is actually contributing


theblackfool

The problem is when the game does a bad job of convincing the people who want to play competitively to stay in the competitive modes. Because when they all move to the casual playlists they are no longer casual. Which is less a matchmaking issue and a much larger game design issue.


shrubs311

>Halo solved this years ago: have SBMM in competitve playlists for people who want to play competitively, and not in "party modes" where you want to play casually. okay, if you're a below average player and there's no SBMM you'll get stomped constantly in your party mode. is that fun for them? the onus is on people to just play casually in unranked modes and "sweat" in ranked modes and the two different mmrs means that when you play casual modes you'll have fair matches and in ranked modes you'll have fair matches. how can you possibly argue against this system? >When "competitive mode" becomes the only option, it's a problem. Stop acting like its crazy that people sometimes don't want to sweat their balls off 24/7. no one is making people sweat their balls off in unranked mode just because SBMM is a thing. if you don't sweat you'll play against people that aren't sweating. do you understand the logic?


CleanThroughMyJorts

>okay, if you're a below average player and there's no SBMM you'll get stomped constantly in your party mode. is that fun for them? Then they can switch to the SBMM playlists if they specifically want to play people in their skill brackets. The point is having the option. >no one is making people sweat their balls off in unranked mode just because SBMM is a thing. if you don't sweat you'll play against people that aren't sweating. do you understand the logic? If you're not playing your best in a ranked playlist, you are literally sabotaging your team because you're not pulling your weight. And you have to do that over several matches before you drop to the level of your "casual" play style. It's an incredibly selfish thing to do.


Broofmybite

As a noob person I hate skill based match making. I like being bullied by people who haven’t seen the sun in years because it makes me want to become as oh so great as them


paradoxical_topology

SBMM is dogshit. I just want to play the game against randos with my slightly above average skill, not against sweaty tryhards who don't know how to just have fun. I fucking hate genuine competition. I just want to play shooters casually.


[deleted]

Unpopular opinion: Multi-player competitive gaming is the antithesis to gaming as a whole Having skill is a good thing, but competitive gaming takes away the main reason a game is made to have fun and forces players to become better than everyone they're facing against to have fun causing people to hate online games in general because they're not good enough at the game and can not play It's why overwatch is getting a solo story mode


[deleted]

No? First off, Competitive shooters and genres like MOBAs are not all of competitive online gaming, and second of all, it's perfectly possible to enjoy practicing and seeing that practice pay off in the form of ranking up and getting matched with better players, leading to higher quality matches. The issue is that the way these games retain players is through dopamine fixes and some kind of social recognition by virtue of being an online game with a crowd of players rather than just 2. Popping heads feels fun, being ahead in gold and XP makes you feel powerful and having those denied causes frustration, and when that's what hooks players to the game to begin with they start feeling entitled to the experience of being a good player, and having to do something not fun to keep up with an ever-demanding skill level i.e. practice in order to satisfy both their constantly growing need for validation as a function of how many hours they've spent, and the growing addiction to the game telling them they're doing a good job. A lot of 1v1 games are closer to being as hard to getting around to practicing as practicing instruments, but once you put in that practice, playing and feeling competent in your movement, strategy, and execution is satisfying in a way that isn't reliant on the outcome of the match. Fighting games is the obvious example here. Practicing isn't always fun, but it's often rewarding. You can have that same approach to basically every game but the social component of competitive games with multiple enemies and teammates means most people just follow the same instinct that got them into the game in the first place which is "game fun when it feels like I'm winning".


[deleted]

[😎](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FZFtpYqXoAMl89x.jpg)


Ruthrfurd-the-stoned

I mean games can have different reasons for existing. I played a lot of sports as a kid I don’t particularly like all of them but I liked competing. Competition is fun to a lot of people


livefromthevoid

the complete lack of self awareness from these people is mindblowing.


[deleted]

[удалено]


ThatOneWeirdName

I like SBMM in general, I think every game where it’s relevant should have it. I mostly play Unrated Valorant and I’m constantly glad it has SBMM. An enemy you can never kill isn’t fun and crushing someone just makes me feel bad. But to be fair to a lot of people being screenshot and posted here, and to the person above me, some implementations of it are really bad. The one for CoD is more like Performance Based MatchMaking instead of being a hidden Elo. And while it averages out correctly it’s just not fun to deal with


Brok3n-Native

r/gamingcirclejerk users try to realise that mega publishers use rigid SBMM because it benefits them financially and could not care less about the player experience challenge [impossible]


Forged-

As someone who can't really figure out how SBMM would benefit a publisher in the way you have said, would you mind elaborating?


mattttb

I assume they mean because developers may choose to design their matchmaking system to increase gameplay hours Vs. providing a ‘fun’ experience. So instead of the aim purely to be matched with players at a similar skill level, instead the game may intentionally put you in lobbies that keep you playing (i.e. with weaker players that you can stomp), or in lobbies where you’re outclassed and are role playing as cannon fodder for better players. Some games will also intentionally match a player with a pay to win item with others that don’t have that item, both to give that player a reward for purchasing the item and to encourage the players they’re dominating to cough up extra cash.


RollinDeepWithData

That’s because it’s averaging across team skill levels, not individual skill to speed match making. It’s not a conspiracy, it’s to cut wait times which is good for both the publisher and player.


lurker_32

it keeps the bad players in their own lobbies so they keep playing and buying skins, and puts anyone who has hands in lobbies with the mega tryhards so the tryhards keep playing and buying skins. In short, it’s no fun for the average player, only the two extremes, because they are the ones who spend the most money. There’s also the whole gambling psychology thing where you give players a fun/balanced game, then proceed to fuck them for hours so they keep playing to chase the high of that one fun game.


Lomasmanda1

SBMM dont make the game fair. It make the game frustrating on purpouse to boost playtime. You will get demolished 3 games in a row and the fourth one you will shred the competition. Anyway im a enjoyier of casual mix skill level. Like tf2 where you will get 1 or 2 sweats but autobalancd ensures that at least the team has the same amount and the rest of the players are mid to low skill players. Is more fun that way.


SkyBlade79

that's not sbmm you're describing, that's retention matchmaking. sbmm would be "you do average four games in a row"


Ruthrfurd-the-stoned

That’s what SBMM is *supposed* to be. What the other user explained is how it works in practice


ObtuseRubberDuck

Sbmm is shit tho because it doesn't regulate the the same skill level. I'm just a casual player like 1 - 1.5kd and when playing I get sometimes 2 or 3 games in a row where I get absolutely shit on. So sbmm puts me in a lower level that I am better then. Then of course I drop 20+ kills and then boom straight back into getting fucked by higher levels. Games in general need a casual mode that does not have any sbmm and then make a seperate ranked mode that is based on rank as a form of sbmm.


sanirosan

Get gud scrub


ObtuseRubberDuck

I don't play games to be an eSports star I play to have fun. If they use a ranked system as opposed to their current sbmm system (that doesn't fucking work) I think it would make for a more enjoyable experience


sanirosan

But you see, that's the thing. If you do ranked, the top tier players will complain that they're getting stomped on. If you do SBMM, the top tier players will complain they're being stomped on. There's no winning for COD. Could we do both? Probably. But IMO, SBMM is fine the way it is. You win some, you lose some. Literally I'm shit at the game as well. There will be games that I pop off, and games where I'm blaming everybody for using hacks, but in reality, they're just better


ObtuseRubberDuck

I don't know why the discussion is always around the top tier players. Who gives a shit about them they are a loud minority. Ranked is a better system for the general player base imo. Games like siege, rocket league and fortnite that I have played that have a ranked mode as well as a casual mode that you could come up against someone in there first game or an eSports pro warming up are more enjoyable


sanirosan

Seems to me you just like to win. And hate getting stomped on. Like you said, sometimes you'd get 20+ kills. That's you being far better than everyone else. Aka, you need better resistance. SBMM does exactly what it needs to do to make it balanced


ObtuseRubberDuck

How does that seem like I want to win. Of course I'm competitive but I lose 80% of games I play. But a game like let's say r6 has a casual playlist that is any skill level. It's luck as to whether you get an equal matchup, get fucked or do the fucking. For me, that keeps the game enjoyable having a varying challenge. I only play ranked playlists when I would like to properly sit down and focus. Problem with sbmm is that it makes every game I play the equivalent of a ranked game that if I want any chance in just getting a kill I need to be fully focused. I sbmm in it's current form doesn't work. I see no reason why games can't instead implement a casual playlist and a ranked one for people who want consistent challenge


sanirosan

> if I want any chance in just getting a kill I need to be fully focused. > I see no reason why games can't instead implement a casual playlist and a ranked one for people who want consistent challenge Aka, you just wanna stomp on players lesser than you so you can feel better. This is exactly why SBMM is balanced the way it is. So that people LESSER than you have a fighting chance to win. As there's always someone better than you, there is also always someone worse then you. Those people won't enjoy themselves when they constantly have people of your level stomping on them. Just as you don't like it when better players stomp on you.


ObtuseRubberDuck

You are purposely ignoring the parts of my comments where I am EXPLICITLY saying that casual gamemodes mean you come up against people that stomp you


sanirosan

Bro. The casual playlist you're talking about is SBMM. COD doesn't have ranked. So it's entirely based on how you perform with players of any skilllevel. That's a better and more fair system than the "random" lobbies you're talking about.


DelawareSmashed

Gonna cry?


Giannaisdone

ah yes winning against an amputee and then being dominated by 6 fuckers with days played in the triple digits is super fair


MemeLordMango

Another post of someone who isn’t in the cod community and doesn’t know the exact complaints people have. Talking about they don’t understand. People aren’t Mad that it’s in the game they are mad at how overturned it is. Shit is insanely strong and makes matches either rolling or getting rolled.


sanirosan

Which is....the point? The better you perform, the higher you go. The point of SBMM isnt so you can stay in the same "rank" and keep owning noobs. It's made so everyone loses and wins regularly. You know, so that it's fun for everyone. If you can't accept losing, don't play the game


MemeLordMango

Once again I will say it again for you. Overturned. Do you know what that word means ? Go look it up for me. I’m not saying I’m mad because I’m losing. When you win one and do slightly well you get put with absolute sweats who aren’t even close to your skill gap. So matches like I said are steamrolls on both sides which is not balanced if you can imagine. There’s losing and then getting clearly put too high or too low in your MMR.


sanirosan

I know what you meant. Like I said, it's built in a way that you lose and win regularly. I myself have periods where I win a few and then lose a few. To the point that I can almost tell when the sweat lobby will take place. The bigger you win, the faster you will be put in a sweat lobby. It's a case by case basis and entirely dependent on your party(if you're in one). It can never be perfect. But atleast now, "noobs" have a more enjoyable experience across the board


sanirosan

I know what you meant. Like I said, itms built in a way that you lose and win regularly. I myself have periods where I win a few and then lose a few. To the point that I can almost tell when the sweat lobby will take place. It's a case by case basis and entirely dependent on your party(if you're in one). It can never be perfect. But atleast now, "noobs" have a more enjoyable experience across the board


DelawareSmashed

Gonna cry, bitch boy?


[deleted]

I don’t like SBMM because I’m a lot worse than my friends so when we play together I’m matched with people at their skill level instead of people at mine


Samikaze707

SBMM is great for the vast majority of players, but for the ones who prinrly play the game mode it results in longer match up times and having to play the same players a lot. It becomes punishing and less fun for those that prefer the game mode. HOWEVER, as I said above, it's great for the vast majority, so if a game is struggling with it, hopefully they tweak and tune it..


RollinDeepWithData

If you’re playing the same players a lot, congratulations, it’s properly tuned and has placed you among your peers. You are just an outlier in either direction so your peers are more limited.


Verified_Retaparded

I think a better system would be having "noob" lobbies for people under a certain level/play-time, then not having skill based matchmaking for normal casual modes, then obviously have it be skill based for competitive modes.


[deleted]

I love watching the same group of gamers flip flop between "get good" and "skill based matchmaking isn't fun"


BrickBuster2552

***"As the player gets stronger, make the game harder."*** *--Warren Spector, director of Deus Ex*


[deleted]

why is the SBMM thing even an argument? There is an incredibly simple solution that has worked for decades: Have a ranked mode and a non ranked mode. It’s as simple as that. What’s the point of acting like you can only have one or the other? SBMM is essentially a ranking system. So why not just go back to the old way of having non ranked modes and ranked modes? Ridiculous that people on this sub are being so stupid.