mitch1971
Member
Suck Big Melon Mammaries.
-
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.
Activision Blizzard released a 25 page study with an A/B test where they secretly progressively turned off SBMM and and turns out everyone hated it
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
My quick take from just glossing over the paper is that, at the very least, good matchmaking is not exactly computationally easy.
ZehDon
Gold Member
A fascinating read.
In any case, one item not addressed - at least that I could find - is addressing the wild swings that occur as the system evaluates players straddling skill brackets. Two wins throws you into an eSports championship, and you need to be curb stomped five or six times before the game finally lowers its evaluation of you and you can have fun again for a round or two. I'm curious to see their plans to address that anecdote, at it's by far the most repeated online.
So, the take away is that favouring skill using SBMM allows for a higher player retention in aggregate. Deprioritising skill causes more mid-match quits, which they translate as "less fun", and triggers lower player retention in aggregate. Perhaps an interesting example of online bubbles versus the average casual with a 30 million sample size?
In any case, one item not addressed - at least that I could find - is addressing the wild swings that occur as the system evaluates players straddling skill brackets. Two wins throws you into an eSports championship, and you need to be curb stomped five or six times before the game finally lowers its evaluation of you and you can have fun again for a round or two. I'm curious to see their plans to address that anecdote, at it's by far the most repeated online.
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
Was my complaint earlier this SBMM swings too wildly
I have a few decent games and I am seeing iridescent cards on the oppo team
In no realm of any dimension should I be playing against top 250s in the world unless they have been reverse boosting which is also a glaring weakness of this system
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
There aren't many games with a greater track record of long term health than CoD. Kinda crazy to suggest they're prioritizing short term gain over long term health when they sell 20+ million copies every year.
clarky
Gold Member
This is the part that i think they have wrong(on page 3):
"4. It should be capable of adapting to a player’s ever-changing performance quickly."
I think It changes too quickly(if I'm reading it right), one good stomp and it thinks I'm an esports god. It needs to give you more matches in the bracket you currently are imo.
They don't acknowledge our complaints anywhere as far as i can tell which is strange as its a common complaint from the community.
Last edited:
KaiserBecks
Member
I‘m ok with SBMM but I prefer the randomness of the lobbies in old COD games. You never knew what to expect from the other team and after a match, you weren’t put in another lobby.
clarky
Gold Member
They should at least give you the option to vote for a rematch or to stick with your winning team mates.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Same lobbies were cool for two reasons. After a bunch of matches you know whos good or not and playstyles if you keep track. Also, the new match loads faster as the game doesn't have to find new players again.
There's no way people are adding friends based off one random match. I never did. I add only if I notice a guy I'm playing with after a bunch of matches.
ZehDon
Gold Member
That's a fair point. It would seem the systems are quick to promote, but slow to demote. I suspect the idea is to bubble the best players into their top 10% quickly and then keep them there so they don't brutalise the rest of us into not wanting to play. The trade off is a few good games and the system thinks your ready for the world cup. It's worth noting they're clearly tuning the system to focus on player retention, and didn't present all of their data points - they might have tried slowing promotions or speeding demotions, only to find it counter-intuitively caused steeper player drop offs.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
This sounds then like it's not a problem with skill based matching, it's a problem with how it is implemented.
A smoother progression curve for ranked matches might help. Other games such as Age of Empires, Street Fighter, and Tekken have both ranked mode and quick match (unranked) mode, which gives players a choice. I don't see an issue with that compromise.
Black_Stride
do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
By older COD you mean Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare and above yeah? (cuz I think CoD2 had server browser and quickmatch)
Cuz those (COD4 and above) had SBMM the only real change is that lobbies stuck together, but when people quit the SBMM will evaluate the lobby before populating it.
Also the number of high skill players was lower in general, I remember in CoD4 and MW2 I could break into the top 50 world rankings easy work, literally sold multiple top 50 XBL accounts......now I dont think I would rank in the top 50,000. (NO its not because im old!)
I really wonder why they got rid of lobbies?
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
cormack12
Gold Member
Player skill will always be a pyramid. When you reach a certain skill level there will be fewer other players of that calibre so technically SBMM cannot match you against players that don't exist. So, really their games will fluctuate the most. I'm not convinced this 'elite' group is doing the complaining. I think it's probably the tier or couple of tiers below, which have a heavier saturation and they've hit their ceiling. Like FUT in Fifa.
I hadn't played COD for years but did get MWII and played Warzone. I actually found it really solid, I am way past my best days and am only mid these days, more a better support/objective player that goes 50:50 on 1v1 engagements.
I had good games and bad games but generally it was enjoyable.
What people really want is unbalanced ranked to pad their xp/level/division. Social/casual should have SBMM turned off (I'm aware some games don't). Ranked has become the mode where the best experience is, because previously players would avoid ultra competitive.
I do agree with
clarky
that there should also be an objective matchmaking mode (spm or something). Or certainly a priority flag. Also agree that the MM shouldn't be schizophrenic and much more stable and consistent for a while.
It's like racing games, you can't complain that you're best time is 1m30 and you're first, then you go up a division and your time is 1m30 but now you're 12th.
I find stacking much more of an issue though tbh, and like it when games do round balancing.
I hadn't played COD for years but did get MWII and played Warzone. I actually found it really solid, I am way past my best days and am only mid these days, more a better support/objective player that goes 50:50 on 1v1 engagements.
I had good games and bad games but generally it was enjoyable.
What people really want is unbalanced ranked to pad their xp/level/division. Social/casual should have SBMM turned off (I'm aware some games don't). Ranked has become the mode where the best experience is, because previously players would avoid ultra competitive.
I do agree with
clarky
that there should also be an objective matchmaking mode (spm or something). Or certainly a priority flag. Also agree that the MM shouldn't be schizophrenic and much more stable and consistent for a while.It's like racing games, you can't complain that you're best time is 1m30 and you're first, then you go up a division and your time is 1m30 but now you're 12th.
I find stacking much more of an issue though tbh, and like it when games do round balancing.
Kerotan
Member
You never heard of S&M?
KaiserBecks
Member
Ah that’s interesting. Yes, I’m talking about MW1+2 (the original ones). Didn’t know they had SBMM, and back then I didn’t have a clue what that actually means. I started noticing the term once people started to complain about it (which was way way later). Your explanation makes sense.
JohnnyTropics
Member
The hyperbole that this journalist needs to use to convey his discomort with 25 pages of content focused on one subject that takes more than 5 minutes to read is alarming.
Last edited:
lughnasadh123
Member
SBMM is a much needed crucial element to have for all aspects to retain the competitive spirt of the game - yes, even in casual modes. You should always be playing around players of your skill level, and the narrow parameters of a SBMM allow that while simultaneously allowing people to climb in ranks without decimating lower ranked players. In fact it's funny as hell reading people complaining about match making suddenly throwing them in higher skilled players when that's the nightmare lower ranked players would have on a more constant basis. Good fucking luck climbing in the environment.
Even the cynical mocking of player-rentention as a reasoning exists makes no sense - no shit more people would quit if your gaming experience consists of getting matched with the same noobs as you for a shot at winning or you hoping like hell you get enough high skilled teammates to carry you on the win. That's no fun for anyone except those looking for an easy fights. For those hating that 50% win rate can only imagine the frustration at the dramatic decrease in it from lower ranked players.
Something that would be more productive AND healthy for players/game would be finding ways to further improve SBMM rather than just removing it altogether.
Even the cynical mocking of player-rentention as a reasoning exists makes no sense - no shit more people would quit if your gaming experience consists of getting matched with the same noobs as you for a shot at winning or you hoping like hell you get enough high skilled teammates to carry you on the win. That's no fun for anyone except those looking for an easy fights. For those hating that 50% win rate can only imagine the frustration at the dramatic decrease in it from lower ranked players.
Something that would be more productive AND healthy for players/game would be finding ways to further improve SBMM rather than just removing it altogether.
Rawbutt Jellybean
Member
I still prefer no SBMM and play far fewer MP games these days because of it. I liked the chaos of a random set of players across any potential skill level. Was fun running into someone who was obviously way above my own skill level and trying to best them. Some of my most memorable games were when I'd get matched against a pro which just never happens anymore unless you're pouring thousands of hours into a game to reach their rank/level.
Companies trying to force 50% win rates to keep you on the hamster wheel buying skins is lame to me. They're the ones that really benefit from it.
Companies trying to force 50% win rates to keep you on the hamster wheel buying skins is lame to me. They're the ones that really benefit from it.
Last edited:
Roxkis_ii
Member
Nah, Activision had to do this in Overwatch too! I sware for like a week the game I were in had no kind of matchmaking. Playing in a lobby with someone way above the skill level of everyone else is no fun for anyone in the lobby. Its no fun in an easy win, and no lesson to be learned in an overwhelming force destroying your face. Playing in games like that did make me play less overwatch.
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
MM in COD can also be just as busted as I just quit a game we were getting steam rolled and matches like this happen daily in COD
This version of SBMM does not fix that as I have said before I am a very average player, maybe slightly above because the average player has a below .9 KD and last I check I was a little over 1 but I see great players in my lobbies often
Possibly they reverse boosted to get there to get clips for their social medias but even if thats the fact thats another problem with this system
Dorfdad
Gold Member
I believe they have some Kind of variable that is switched on which lags or slowS you down
Roxkis_ii
Member
I will say, if COD matchmaking is simular to overwatch's, then when you have a really good player on the red team, there is normally a really good player on your own team to even it out some (if their not sandbagging in your match).
It's kind of a skill in itself to recognize when your the potato, or the potato carrier and then adjust accordingly.
If I'm playing when I get off work, I'm always the potato though lol.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Even if a game maker doesnt want to split up the gamer base into SBMM and unranked casual modes, you can still have one set of lobbies and SBMM to a degree.
Just splice up the gamers into a small number of tiers. Maybe 10 tiers (I took a guess there for a giant game like COD). Within each tier, there's enough variety of gamers in each set. So if your lobby isnt great and youre in tier 8/10, there's not going to be an uber pro gamer going 40-0. Some gamers will be better than others but youre all kind of in the same boat. And your SBMM rank doesnt change for lets say every 20 games. That would allow the lobby to play lots of matches if you want together before your profile ranking gets recalculated.
The problem with COD SBMM (and any other one like it), is it tries to be so fine whisking you away after each match so it can peg you into SBMM slot #2,492,206. And then you got a good game and now jump to #2,273,826 etc....
When I used to play EA hockey online they had teams all divided up into divisions. As you win or lose you moved around, but it wasnt so granular because you could sometimes play the same team right away. So it shows after one match, the system didn't banish each team to other sides of the spectrum. My team was pretty good for a while before 99 cheaters took over, but even in our big win streaks it's not like we hit division 1 playing godly gamers just because we won 5 in a row. It edged up slowly.
Just splice up the gamers into a small number of tiers. Maybe 10 tiers (I took a guess there for a giant game like COD). Within each tier, there's enough variety of gamers in each set. So if your lobby isnt great and youre in tier 8/10, there's not going to be an uber pro gamer going 40-0. Some gamers will be better than others but youre all kind of in the same boat. And your SBMM rank doesnt change for lets say every 20 games. That would allow the lobby to play lots of matches if you want together before your profile ranking gets recalculated.
The problem with COD SBMM (and any other one like it), is it tries to be so fine whisking you away after each match so it can peg you into SBMM slot #2,492,206. And then you got a good game and now jump to #2,273,826 etc....
When I used to play EA hockey online they had teams all divided up into divisions. As you win or lose you moved around, but it wasnt so granular because you could sometimes play the same team right away. So it shows after one match, the system didn't banish each team to other sides of the spectrum. My team was pretty good for a while before 99 cheaters took over, but even in our big win streaks it's not like we hit division 1 playing godly gamers just because we won 5 in a row. It edged up slowly.
Last edited:
II_JumPeR_I
Member
I call bullshit.
They never had it off.
They turned it into 11 but not off.
Clown company
They never had it off.
They turned it into 11 but not off.
Clown company
Sushi_Combo
Member
How about they dump this matchmaking diarrhea and just put in a server browser
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
I dont know when COD added SBMM, but those old 360 era games musta had zero SBMM. At least to me it seemed like zero. And people loved it back then.
If people hated zero SBMM, COD game sales would had dropped like a rock back then.
You can tell when the EOMM kicks in on somebody when you see some level 700 guy at the very bottom of the match at the end. He must have had a couple of great games or two and the game 'rewards him' with gun jams, reduced damage, aim resist, gun bouncing (gun just magically bounces up when you point it at a 'protected player') and more.
I also suspect they do something to make players invisible if you're doing too well as well, meaning you will run around a level and can't find anybody, and/or somehow 90% of your encounters is getting shot in the back.
You can tell EOMM is kicking in because you've taken a break from the game for a few days, you come on and you're hitting shot after shot with nigh perfect aim and your marksmen rifle is taking people out with 1 shot in the chest and above. You dominate one match. The very next match, the controls feel sluggish. There's certain players you aim at and you can never quite put the cursor on them. Your gun either bounces around them or your gun magically jams when you try to shoot them. Guns that normally take 1 or at most 2 shots, the first shot always seems to magically miss, the second shot hit markers and then maybe the 3rd will actually get registered, so you have to shoot at someone a minimum of 3 times to take them out, which is extremely difficult to do if you're using a single shot weapon. Your claymores now don't go off or people can run right through them and keep going. It's clear as day that they are neutering top players if they start doing too well and it results in them 'slowing down', so they are now forced to turtle and take it slow if they have a run and gun style. Combined with SBMM, the EOMM means that these high ranking players are weirdly finish at the bottom of the list regularly in games like Free for all.
I'm not against SBMM and in getting put in matches with people around my proximity. What I AM against is the game cheating and protecting players with invisible force fields and quietly turning off aim assist or making bullets miss, reducing damage and other things to boost up other players. You never know if you're really improving or if the game is babying you to try to 'make it fun' and the game punishes you for actually putting the time in and working on your skills.
I also suspect they do something to make players invisible if you're doing too well as well, meaning you will run around a level and can't find anybody, and/or somehow 90% of your encounters is getting shot in the back.
You can tell EOMM is kicking in because you've taken a break from the game for a few days, you come on and you're hitting shot after shot with nigh perfect aim and your marksmen rifle is taking people out with 1 shot in the chest and above. You dominate one match. The very next match, the controls feel sluggish. There's certain players you aim at and you can never quite put the cursor on them. Your gun either bounces around them or your gun magically jams when you try to shoot them. Guns that normally take 1 or at most 2 shots, the first shot always seems to magically miss, the second shot hit markers and then maybe the 3rd will actually get registered, so you have to shoot at someone a minimum of 3 times to take them out, which is extremely difficult to do if you're using a single shot weapon. Your claymores now don't go off or people can run right through them and keep going. It's clear as day that they are neutering top players if they start doing too well and it results in them 'slowing down', so they are now forced to turtle and take it slow if they have a run and gun style. Combined with SBMM, the EOMM means that these high ranking players are weirdly finish at the bottom of the list regularly in games like Free for all.
I'm not against SBMM and in getting put in matches with people around my proximity. What I AM against is the game cheating and protecting players with invisible force fields and quietly turning off aim assist or making bullets miss, reducing damage and other things to boost up other players. You never know if you're really improving or if the game is babying you to try to 'make it fun' and the game punishes you for actually putting the time in and working on your skills.
Pop
Member
Don't believe them
First off SBMM should not ever be in social playlists. That's the majority of the problems in today's matchmaking. SBMM should be strictly ranked only.
Why not just have like it was back in Halo 3/ COD 4/Black Ops days? Oh I know why because they want you buying all those little microtransactions.
Every 3 or so games after being bad the system puts you in a lobby were you seem to be better than everyone else. Which makes you feel good and more likely to spend $$$ in their shops. They ain't tricking me
First off SBMM should not ever be in social playlists. That's the majority of the problems in today's matchmaking. SBMM should be strictly ranked only.
Why not just have like it was back in Halo 3/ COD 4/Black Ops days? Oh I know why because they want you buying all those little microtransactions.
Every 3 or so games after being bad the system puts you in a lobby were you seem to be better than everyone else. Which makes you feel good and more likely to spend $$$ in their shops. They ain't tricking me
GreatnessRD
Member
Only the pathetic and weak complain about having to face similar skilled players.