So if everybdy get better than everybdy is sweaty so it wont matter 😂 point is most of us dnt wanna play the sweats but the sweats wanna play us so they can break records why would casual want tht? Makes no sense @@Set451
I dont remember that “one guy in the lobby” going off as being a problem back then but then again i was a kid and was still capable of having fun even when losing
That's it.... ppl wanna be good when they are garbage. That's why luke has this opinion with every game. Casue he gets cooked in EVERY GAME. Read the percentages and do the math... it barely comes out to a 1 or 2 kill increase for bad players
Smurfing is not liked by 99% of people, it's a problem now with a lot of games. People need to have fun playing games, being dependent on wining for fun is a zero sum game.
@@Outright__ difference between losing 1 game because the dude was barely better than you vs losing 5 games in a row to smurfs. Your a loser if the only way you can feel good about yourself is too beat people who don't know how to play....
@@dinodj5 Having any manipulation in matchmaking allows smurfs use it against it. Why I never got the argument that I want to roll over a bunch of casuals. If I ever I wanted to do that I can do it much easier now with SBMM. The fact I don’t want to lower my stats in the first place shows I’m only here to play a game and not a sweat fest like everyone calls it.
But sometimes people have to Smurf because their friends aren’t good enough to rank up for example my friend is terrible at cod he’s realistically silver but playing with me he got to platinum once I get to crim I can’t play with him and have to make a new account
See the main issue that I see is that these games don't understand balancing the teams. This is why I advocate for lobbies staying instead of the lobbies disbanding after one match. If the lobby is still there after the match, there can be a system that balances the teams after every match to make the game feel more different. I don't know how it'll work for squads since that might be harder to control but having lobbies stay instead of disbanding might help team balancing every match. Edit: I feel like this might solve the sbmm issue because the only reason why the older games were so much more fun is because the lobbies didn't disband after every match and there was a system that rearrenges teams to balance the next match. Plus it might make games feel more like a community so I see no downsides to this unless it uses peer to peer matchmaking
This would result in the same issues, especially in cases when one team is getting stomped. This data just show cod players don't now what they want other then not lose
lobbies disbanding was one of the worst decisions they made, nothing more fun than having a good rivalry going on over like 10 games against a specific team especially if the lobby was a full team vs full team
the same way it did before. It keeps squads together but balances the rest. hardly would you ever PUB into a match where both teams are more then 2-3 people on the same squad. so its not really an issue. If you squad is the one with the weak link it doesnt count for that because of your other members.
The problem I have with how Activision has been implementing SBMM lately is that when I have one good game, the algorithm will put me in with high skilled players in the next one. Then i get curb stomped. Then after that match i get put in with lower skilled players. It's that back and forth i have an issue with. And I've always been a crap to mid tier player. But i always had fun and could play for hours on end in the days of Black ops, BO2 and MW3. Yes they had a level of SBMM but it wasn't as noticeable back in the day.
Dude it's the same base game you've played self admittedly for hours at at time at points for over nearly a decade...... maybe you just need to do something else for a bit.
I think its a result of no lobbys being kept. I could play for hours with the same lobby of 12 all night or one or two rotating out. PLUS it balanced the teams.
I still don't buy it. I'm literally the 90s kid that grew up with the very beginning of online play and the birth of franchises like Halo and COD. Never once was it an issue in the past. Lobbies stayed, teams were almost always automatically balanced, save for the odd squad that would come in and just wreck house, but even then you could just leave the lobby and be rematched with other players, and so would that squad. I don't know, I feel like the online infrastructure has gotten so much worse, from match making capabilities to chat capabilities, it's all much worse than it was during the 360 and PS3 era.
Agreed. I think that some of the ridiculous streaks (gunship that can be glitched and was never patched, and strafe run in CW for example) are just annoying, and with the strafe, it's much too low of a score to obtain (can kill the whole team multiple times). That contributes to some rage-quitting for sure. No good ground streaks in CW either.
True, my best guess most of the people supporting this have grown up on these balancing systems and can't accept it works without. But there's an even better solution: create a sbmm and a random playlist. You play what you want and everyone is happy but no it has to be only one. Such polarized world.
@@Blockhead2 Yep. There's a level of conditioning that is unreal. If you do well for a few games...now your ping is 90ms+ and the lobby is stacked against you.
It's cause in the early days everyone was a noob. Now, there are players who have played fps for decades, and players who are just starting. The skill gap is way bigger than it used to be
@@cftncfjlphgfb SBMM tends to penalize the players that have been playing for decades. 90ms ping and teammates that don't really go to OBJ etc. I'm all about helping new players, yet when 5 are on my team at once, it's going to be a loss almost every time.
There is a difference between playing a match and losing and having the game give you a match specifically designed to MAKE YOU LOSE. Its logically flawed. Old cods didn't need this system to be the biggest games on the planet.
yea as someone who's a tryhard and quite good at cod having my team be worse than the other team by design just because i "balance" the teams isn't fun im not having fun cus if i don't do everything we lose, my team isn't having fun cus they're getting shit on by a superior team and the other team isn't having fun because they're getting shit on by one person
@@Im_helpless exactly this bro. I be wondering sometimes why I an averagely good player has to do everything for my team that's not as good. While the other team has like 2 or 3 people that are tryharding like there life depends on it.
I keep seeing this point buts it’s a false notion. That game you get assigned to “intentionally lose,” is just a jump in skill. If you failed the test in skill, you should be extra appreciative of SBMM lol you essentially get a taste of what it’d be like and then get upset you’ve been spared prior
People don't like competitive games. They think they do but they don't, want they really like is winning, they want all the trappings of competition without the hard bits. They'd rather play a 100 matches against bad players win 100 and log off thinking they are Gods, instead of 1 match against someone who will give them a bit of trouble
But that literally cod mo is lobby stomping, Activision and new cod fans turned it into something it not like a competitive fps zombies is literally their second most popular mode which proves it was never supposed to be competitive
The problem with how Activision implements SBMM is that it's meant to optimize engagement over anything else, and the way it does it is actually really scummy. The casual playlist out the gate have SBMM. Casual is supposed to be less competitive by nature, but if you're a good player that just means every lobby you get put into will be filled other players exactly like you. In a playlist where it's supposed to be low stakes, they make it extremely competitive with no incentive to win. If you were to have a poor performance in that match, the game then uses an algorithm to put you in a lobby with worse players than you so you can get back into the lobby you were previously in, and the same goes with if you're a lower skill player and you have a good match. All this to mean that you're never actually getting better at the game, because the game is always going to nake sure you're going up against players equal to your skill, and if you're already not that good of a player, then there's no reason to actually get better at the game. So is all so they can optimize engagement, which in turn will hopefully get players to buy their extremely overpriced A.I. generated bundles, which unfortunately will work unless players wake the hell up and realize what Activision is doing. Players are having high hopes for BO6, and I'm calling it now, most of the stuff they're adding is either going to be a gimmick or be underwhelming. They will never sell you a game so good that you won't be next years title.
"because the game is always going to make sure you're going up against players equal to your skill", isn't that just how mmr/elo system works in general? MOBAs and tactical shooters been doing it for decades and it's a non-problem there. And yes, mmr/elo still exists in non-ranked/casual matches in those games, if not then new players would just get steamrolled every single time. I don't play COD, but is the game that casual that the idea of proper matchmaking scares the players?
@@asddapidk how my 1.4kd means I have to go against cunts that are nearly 3.0kds. Sbmm does not fairly match you with players your skill at all. To top that off it makes my ping got up to 100ms when I’m using Ethernet
@@asddap There is a differents you can have no sbmm but still have skill balancing thats what fps have done for ages . When you got into a lobby after that the game balances teams but never looks at you as a player befor to match you against other players that have all the same stats as a player as you . The problem is for years now bad players have been shiled from beeing bad when you throw them into 1 playlist were they arnt good anymore so there ego gets hit they instantly leave . Removeing sbmm only works if you do it everywere over more then 1 game to chang the culture . Right now COD is basicly play meta only everybody is sweating no matter what no chill is allowed ever becouse you play against a copy of your self every gun fight .
This is one of the reasons why bots (while sometime frustrating) can be important for video games. That way the dominance of certain players isn't always at the cost of an equal number of players enjoyment
I disagree If u ever played halo infinite and a bot joins its OP 😂 I hope u realize that bot can see thru the map and anticipate your moves if anything if someone leaves the game shouldn't count and the match should have less XP and the person who left needs a 30-1hr ban from playing
Agreed with the caveat that bots should only be used in the lower skill base with lower CPU skill levels. There's no sense in higher level terminator bots.
@@gregviews Bots in halo infinite are completely useless, all they do is give the opposite team free points. You might as well play against a sack of rice.
I just need them to toss me a bone sometimes. My issue is none of my friends are my skill and now they get punished for paying with me and with cod specifically all quit. I’m now stuck alone to suffer in fake ranked games even though I play pubs. Another example of how it hurts the game a little is a friend wanted to play fortnite last night. They haven’t played it for over a year. The matches we played were identical to the matches I played the day before with a different friend who actually does play a lot and is close to my skill level. My friend last night just kept getting slammed by people and didn’t seem to be enjoying it to much cause they had to learn all this new stuff and play fortnite gods lol it’s just getting exhausting these last few years as a person whose played these kind of games for almost two decades now.
That’s interesting. Because when I hop in a game with my kids I benefit from there being more bots or lower skilled players. But then there would be times we run into players that are way higher skilled than me and then that’s a nightmare cause I gotta try to get my kids to retreat when they’re loosing their minds and getting downed lmao.
@@hammersticks7138 you only benefit soo much, I do play overwatch with firends that are decent but I do have some freinds that haven't touched it in years and when they come play with me they get stompped on and I can only do so much to help them out.
now I don't play shooters but I used to play a lot of league back in the day. I was in challenger soloq but I'd often switch to my gold ranked account when playing normals with my gf who plays league casually and is only in bronze; so that she's not punished when playing with me by players on the enemy team with higher skill level than her, or worse, a player on my skill level playing a meta champ and is actually tryharding; and I could just play for fun regardless whether we win or lose and finally get to try out unconventional builds and playstyles that I couldn't do playing ranked. another reason is that there have been many times where lower ranked players would see my emblem and frame on my challenger account and somehow immediately expect me to always perform on the top level even when playing normals. they'd trashtalk me if I don't carry the team on a normal match which can be ignored on occasion but gets really annoying when it happens a lot.
@@delihogg it intentionally gives you matches to lose by matching you with players that are better not taking into account different hardware and cheaters
People forget that the older Call of Duty games didn't have a competitive mode. There was no rank system. Players today care way more about their rank and will sweat as hard as they can to achieve that. The reason why you remember old MW2 and Black Ops 1 so fondly was because people literally didn't sweat as much back then. The skill ceiling has been raised across the board. I can feel it with Overwatch. A typical platinum game in OW1 back in 2016 is like mid Silver now in OW2. Lots of people are chasing that internet fame, they wanna become big streamers. There are money incentives now. Twitch wasn't a thing back then, and esports was a fraction of what it is today. Gamers are sweating more than ever. Doesn't matter which rank, everyone is try harding these days, and I don't think that was as prevalent back in 2007-2010
Peopl back then did sweat as much the differents is you coud releaxe knowing not everybody is the same skill tier you had games you go fucked and games you fucked so peopl were not allways going full meta sitting in a corner mode . With sbmm you know everybody is like you if you go into a gun fight the only differents you will make is hardrunning the meta loadouts and getting peopl from behind by camping . Its how COD has shaped its culture not that peopl have become more sweaty
The thing is, people who are frustrated with Skill Based Matchmaking and are informed do not ask for it to be switched off; they ask for it to be toned down - more balanced matchmaking. My experience playing Halo Infinite - which 343 admitted had strong SBM - was a slog and frustrating for me. I'm a pretty average player, but I don't want to play competitively; I don't want to be a professional gamer or have an experience akin to that and so I only play to have fun. But strong SBM constantly matches me with players that are above me to give me highly competitive games for my level in order for me to improve. If every game is me fighting for my life, that's not fun. There should be variety; some games should feature players at a lower levels than me so I can have a relaxed game. That's what ultimately stopped me playing Halo Infinite: the game was no longer relaxing and was constantly a highly competitive experience. So I don't want to play games with people ten skill levels higher or lower; I want games with people two or three levels higher or lower - more balanced. Strong SBM or no SBM is not balanced.
It's kinda sad we actually need legit research papers to prove SBM makes everyone but the top 10% happier but if there's one thing we can count on, it's gamers will always be mad at everything but themselves
I remember old battlefield games where you would get trapped in the spawn because the other team was way over powered.😂 it’s funny but not every match haha
Oh yea that was amazing. And awful lmao. In Battlefield 2 on PC I was devastating in the jets. On gulf of oman, trapping the american team on the carrier then using that bomber that had 5 bombs in it was crazy. The explosions were outrageous back then too. I remember several times getting like 20 kills at a time as they waited for a helicopter or something to spawn in. Also back then the gun on the carrier was a person in it, not AI and you could destroy it. So I'd purposely fly in aiming straight at the gun blowing it up before it could even see me. Then circle around and wreak havoc on the carrier lol.
I don't play competitive FPS games, but I can give an example of how some players just want to spend all their time just griefing less experienced players. About a year after Elite Dangerous came out, some players just started hanging around the starter systems in tooled up ships, basically just to trash newbs, over and over again. Myself and a few online mates set up a little group that patrolled these systems and defended the newer players from these attacks, and it was quite obvious that they didn't want to actually play the game, and most of the time rage quit rather than get into a fair (ish - I wasn't that good! But they didn't hang around to find out, just dropped connection) fight. They then went online and whinged in the forums that we were ruining their "piracy" playstyle! I can only imagine the situation in much worse these days.
I just remember the days where some matches you get blown out, some matches you wipe the other team, sometimes it’s a really good balanced match. The experience itself was balanced out. NOW if you happen to have the rare game that you win the next 10 games you get stomped on, it drastically shortens my (and everyone one I know) playtime.
Games need to go back to its roots. Bring back lobbies. You can scope out who's in the lobby and have the choice to leave or ready up beforehand. You know if you ready up aginst people youre better than youll get the win and a little XP. If you decide to ready up with the sweats you know you might lose but will get hella XP.
Sweats are the worst thing to happen to online gaming. It's not fun to lose HARD every match. It's not fun learning to becoming a sweat for a game. It's not fun playing as a sweat and sweating the entire time to min max your gameplay. It's just boring, which is the opposite of why people play games in the first place. It's a form of entertainment. If it's not entertaining then it's just a waste of time.
If the sweats want to win with no effort, they should just play solo against bots. What they actually want is to stroke their own egos by stepping on other players.
When Microsoft introduced Hourglass PvP system to Sea of Thieves some time ago, I remember my win ratio was above average. But these days my win ratio is abysmally low, and the only reason I can think for that is that a huge chunk of the game's playerbase have either quitted the game or don't play Hourglass anymore. So I end up matched against veterans and sweatlords who still play that mode. And honestly, that game mode ain't fun anymore, so I rarely play it either.
That's the thing, Hourglass was the equivalent to ranked match-making compared to adventure being unranked/casual. However the more toxic part of the community has driven out players so much that they've been spending the last year trying to win the casual fanbase back, and the toxic community doesn't want to accept that reality.
@@AlexiaHoardwingI'm one of those. I used to play in the arena era. I stopped when I only had sweats and now I'm back and I only play in the safer seas. Sweats need Noobs, but Noobs don't need sweats.
Is always funny how the solution of the tryhards devolve into "get at my level", "dont play the game" and "they are tourist anyway", everything because they want to feel good curbstomping people with lifes that don't allowed them to be 5 hours playing games. Thats not the point of being competitive? Playing a contested games for victory?
The issue here is that, the only bit of data that the paper actually gives regarding any type of player retention shows a 1.75% variant in player return rate which is easily chaulked up to margin of error. Then when they make the bold claim of "no SBMM was worse for everyone and everyone hated it" they provide zero data or evidence to support that statement. All this paper tells me is that SBMM, in the best case senario, improves the likelihood that a player will return to the game by an average of 1%... The entire argument for having SBMM is that it supposedly increases player retention, yet they are specifically ommitting data related to that argument.
What I never understood is what was wrong with the system older games used since forever? Unranked = no skill based matchmaking, ranked = Skill Based Matchmaking of some type.
Well, because no one wants to get curb stomped while queuing into a casual unranked match either. Why should queuing for the sweaty tryhard mode be the solution to that? Seems counterintuitive. So I suppose your solution would have to have two unranked modes, one without SBMM and one with. (Looks like this is addressed at around the 11:00 mark.)
@@ByrvurraThe solution to that already exists. Older cods had sbmm too. It just wasn’t as strict. The casual mode is where connection should be the major factor in matchmaking with a bit of sbmm to prevent complete landslide outliers.
It all revolves around selling more microtransactions. Activision doesn't care what the players want. They don't even care if they release a good game.
Man I love this channel. We need more people that have critical thinking skills and can look at all the info, seeing diff sides and then coming to a logical conclusion, like Luke does. It is rare these days to see it. Love, love your thoughtful non emotional takes. Breath of fresh air.
People are who for getting rid of SBMM are literally ONLY the annoying sweats that don’t have jobs that are bored of not being able to bully people at their skill level. Get a job and play against people your skill level, grow up.
I can remember year 2 of destiny 2 when me and the clan that I was in at that time were playing iron banner... We won like 60 rounds of that game mode in a row without losing a single match... I got my "I made this for you" medal that day wich is a 50 kill streak in a single game without dying. I also remember that some full enemy teams just left the match because we fought them earlier that day and we literally would win the round before it even started! We played for maybe 6 or 7 hours and we in the end only stopped because matching times went up until we didnt found anyone anymore for like 30 minutes straight... So at some point we pissed off basicly every european player so that they just stopped playing ironbanner on pc for a moment!
I don't completely agree with this logic. OG MW2 and BO2 didn't have SBMM as high as the new COD games and yet those games still maintained high player numbers, they're played in high volume till today. If your logic was 100% those game player numbers would have died off YEARS ago. I believe there should be some level of SBMM in competitive games like this, the softer players do need lobbies just for them to have fun, but the level at which SBMM has been cranked up to now is insane and it leaves no one satisfied. If everyone generally plays with people around their level, there is no point for the main reason people play COD, the killstreaks. What is the point of having a 12, 14, or 20 killstreak reward if you're never going to use it? Making the majority of your game sweaty as well also incentives terrible playstyles, everyone needs to use that one-shot sniper, find the best cheese spots and just wait around in corners just to get a damn radar. I do not believe any "research" conducted by Activision because they have never been interested in making games that are best for players, its always about what business model they can design to get more money from gamers. A research paper from Activision is like reading research paper from BP discussing the impacts of oil on marine life.
Except you said it yourself. They dont care about how the game feels as long as people like you keep eating up cod slop and logging in. The arguement ends when you log in and tell them they can keep doing whatever they like. Just play xdefiant
I say keep the high skilled players with the high skilled players why would they want to go against casuals. That wouldn't be fun for them. If they want to play against casuals, just to destroy them. Why? All I can think of is so they can refill their big egos, in my opinion
Some want to crush low level players because it ruins the low level players day. It's like how people will go and troll/grief people just because it's fun for them.
While there is some truth to what you say, it's understandable from the perspective of a better player as well. There are so many weapons and different builds in MW3, but only two are commonly used because they are the best. It feels like you are forced to use the best options in the game every time. Another issue is that CoD isn't really a competitive game. RNG and timings play too big of a role to justify matchmaking as strict as it is right now. Trust me, even the sweats want to relax sometimes. Their level of play when they are relaxing is still higher than what other players achieve even when they are trying. I love competitive games. Valorant is my main game, and in that game, I absolutely agree that stomps are not fun, not even for the winning team. Sure, I'll take the Elo, but I want to get out as quickly as possible. Close games are what get your heart going. If the matchmaking didn’t result in close games in Valorant, I don’t think I would play it.
But that's the thing: if you had a skilled-player only lobby, some of them would get curbstomped. Cause there's still skill difference in the top, and somebody's got to lose. But since they are sweaty, they hate to lose even more than casuals and that lasts even less, it's all there in the paper
@@zephr147Funny. I started playing Valorant yesterday, I still don't have the level to play ranked, all the unranked matches I played were stomp. 5 professionals on the other side, me and 5 similar to me in my side. 7 games in a row 13-0 for the other team. I'm just going to uninstall. My team looking at the ground and others afk, the other team 100% accuracy in Headshot. This would be COD without SBMM.
The only reason people talk about SBMM is because streamers cry about it. They wanna look badass on stream with a bunch of kills. It’s why they use vpn’s to try and get bot lobbies. But as a player who plays it for fun. Sbmm is way more fun than getting dropped into a bunch of lobbies with a bunch of try hards.
Personally, I think that if SBMM doesn't include unlocks like guns, attachements and perks, it's less reliable. I might be wrong, but I have a strong feeling that "available tools" for any given match should be as equal as possible.
Imagine just playing the game to have fun and you wouldn't have to worry about sbmm, but nope people gotta play this game like their life is depending on it and sweat their cheeks off using meta loadouts 24/7 and nothing else
Think the biggest problem with people complaining about things like SBMM is content creators have much more power influencing players than they think. Best example I can think of is Destiny where we had content creators saying it's too easy and all their fans agree cause "well he/she is good at the game so they know that they're talking about" but when they experience things that are harder they hate it. COD is just another example of you have like high tier skill CC's complaining about SBMM so all of their fans agree with them, but once they experience what the high tier wants they hate it.
People with higher skill being mad about SBMM is like being 25 and getting mad about how you can’t play basketball with 7 year olds. That is so pathetic. This is exactly why I quit online competitive games altogether.
Lmao way to twist the story. A much more accurate comparison would be 25 year olds with some decent skill not liking the fact that instead of playing with average people they're constantly forced to play with NBA pro's because they did decent in a couple of streetball games.
@@nandoman4769 but like that doesn't happen. All these people are on their high horse feeling amazing as they won a couple games - then after actually getting challenged and losing the next match / having to actually try they cry like a man baby that it's too hard. These systems aren't as crazy as people make them out to be, you aren't being put against god incarnated for winning a couple games, your just finally being given a fair fight, stop whining
You dont get it Sbmm makes it more and more competitive for the aver person . If you play against your self every game then what do you think happens of course meta hoeing everygame and alot of camping . Also its bad for the aver person you will never get better you just stay were you are for basicly ever . You quit becouse there is 0 ways to improve with sbmm throwing another copys of you against you . What is the chance that you will run into a insane high skilled player ? .
@@xythiera7255 LOL facts! The OP is an idiot . If you CONSTANTLY play against yourself you will NOT improvel. This is LITERALLY thef acts of life. People don't like to compete. They want participation trophies. NO!! GIT....GUD!! Or at least try. Also one day is insufficient evidence from Activision. Should have dedicated to an entire month.
Like some others have mentioned, lobby persistence would help out tremendously with everything. That way people get a feel for how good people on both teams are and their playstyles. So that they can counter it and such. The way it is now, by time you figure out whos doing what its over and you are thrown into a new match not knowing who is what again. It may still keep things sweaty but at least then you have a reasonable way to play around it.
This is how I'd change it step by step... 1) Base matchmaking on account rank bracket; If 100 is max rank then 4 categories exist (01 25) (26 50) (51 75) (76 100) 2) As a failsafe for once a playerbase declines; "If 60 seconds pass and the match is not filled, players of other brackets are admitted"
I think the real issue with CoD’s sbmm model is how quickly and strictly players are sorted into their “brackets”, it feels like ping-ponging between hard fought wins and matches you felt destined to lose.
funny thing is, the sweats will play just as hard even against the bad players...but it's more fun for them. They don't want SBMM because it evens the playing field. The only thing I don't like about SBMM is if you have friends of different skill level, it's hard to play together. It's not fun for the people that aren't any good.
They literally don’t play as hard, it just feels the same to a scrub. Most sweats will play with suboptimal load outs for verity sake and still do well.
@@bannedmann4469 tell me the dude in the video that is the pro playing warzone against some normal players, is not trying hard and sweating his ass off in those clips. Streamers just want to crap on worse players for the content.
@@bannedmann4469 I don't play that shit game, but it looked like your typical try hard crackhead COD player that would complain about SBMM ruining their fun while dumping on normal people that just want to play the game.
The main problem with SBMM is that you get punished for winning and rewarded for losing. What I mean by this is that when you win a match, the matchmaker adjusts to make the next match harder, but if you lose it does the opposite. Most of the people who complain about SBMM are the ones trying super hard to win, which results in an even harder game match after match. It eventually gets to the point where you cannot win no matter how hard you try, and this leads to frustration.
I think there are a lot of people out there who choose to play games like this, which just need to come to terms with the fact that they don't actually enjoy the struggle of competitive pvp games.
THIS! PLEASE SAY IT LOUDER! Some people wanna fit into a group so bad that they deny it just isn't for them. It's like trying to fit a square peg in the round hole. It aint gonna work. Instead of crying to have the manufacturer change that round hole into a square, why don't they just go do something else that interests them? Tens of thousands of people play GTA online probably every week if not every day. Not me. It's not for me and that's okay because it's not the end of the world
THIS! like the guy who just wants to use his rec league softball games to drink with his buddies, but the rest of the guys on the team are taking it really seriously cause their younger and are more competitive
Totally agree !! Just like elden ring ! Because the game is hard does not mean that they have to cater to a "majority" that never touch a souls game in the first place !
Can we all collectively start calling CoD matchmaking what it is? Engagement Optimized Matchmaking. Activision has the patent for it (retention based/engagement optimized) and has been using it since 2019. They reference SBMM, but they are the only company that throws players in lopsided lobbies to keep players gaming. It results in "yo-yo" games, 3-4 close games, 1 gimme match where you're higher a skill than the lobby, and sometimes being thrown to the wolves due to poor team balancing. I'm curious to check out the document on their matchmaking because they sure don't talk about it or call their matchmaking what it is. I'd be surprised if the document shows that it's a true mmr system.
I got attacked online on some big cod youtubers chat for saying that SBMM was a good thing, and here we are. Idiots like those just want easy games, we have seen it time and time again with them playing so much they find exploits and well exploit them, we have seen them using VPNs to access bot lobbies. Its crazy to me that people think SBMM is a bad idea, the only people that do are either sweaty youtubers looking for views, or those who watch sweaty youtubers and take their word as gospel.
You can't trust Activision sir the sbmm they use can literally determine If you hit the target. Their own documents have detailed that they literally make it easier for someone who keeps loosing by giving them more help better aim etc. I can't rock with that. Also I believe the term is EOMM now for Activision
One example, in statistics, if you have 100 players, you could classify them as follows: 10 are very good players, 20 are good players, and the remaining 70 are casual players. In a 6 vs 6, if teams are paired randomly, the probability that you, as a casual player, are on a team with no good or very good players, while the opposing team has at least one good or very good player, is calculated as: 1-[(C64,6)/(C94/6)] => 9.99% This means that a casual player will experience a “bad match approximately once every 10 matches. Therefore, the skill based matchmaking system is not good for good players and not having the system is not a big deal for casual players. If any of my calculations are incorrect, I welcome someone to let me know, I did them quickly
Easy fix for me was if I wanted to relax I would either play a PvE multiplayer game or a single player game. Otherwise if I want to play against other players I have to prepare for anything.
Someone in r/destinythegame said they didn't like SBMM because when they (high skill players) play with friends, their friends are stuck facing high skill players. So basically they didn't want their friends to experience the very thing that SBMM is meant to prevent for everybody.
The problem is, whichever noob does the least-worst in the noob match, They then get slingshotted up to the insane sweat pros for the next match (because of the SBMM). Then get destroyed and go 1-20, and get thrown back to the noobs again and repeat the cycle. And it's this whiplash of 'Do good, Get punished'. Win 1, lose 1, win 1, lose 1. Over and over, that people are sick of. They'd rather just fight pro's when they naturally happen to, and fight noobs when they naturally happen to, without feeling (and knowing) that there's some ai bullish watching and controlling you. and contently going from 0 to 100. Casual to Extreme spawn-killing unplayable insanity.
Yeah idk it seems like it’s the contrary because everyone’s “skill” isn’t taken to account as much I’m an average player I have a 1.35 and I average 600 spm but 7 out of 10 games I play I’m getting stomped in so it has it’s flaws just need to be more optimized
@monstermarc227 that isn't the average player, the average players plays a few hours a week year round, the people you're thinking of are the 5 percent you hear from on social media all the time who grind the game then complain about SBMM
I played the recent COD MW2 online a bit, definitely casual but I played a lot of of old school MW back in the day. I am not good but consider myself okay, for me the SBMM worked really well. Most matches were close with teams finishing within 10 points of each other, but not sweaty. Granted I would not play more than an hour or so but I never felt I was unfairly matched, just sometimes the players were better which is okay.
All ima say is when I was younger and getting my ass handed to in BO1 MW3 and BO2 I never stopped playing I kept playing to the point where I could hold my own. But I do agree that strict SBMM should only be in ranked and everything should be connection based first with a slight emphasis on SBMM. But like I said I was garbage at one point I kept playing and got better and even dropped my first nuclear on BO3.
expectations for games are different now. there is so much choice and variety, that many will just play a different game if they are not enjoying one. EDIT although I personally stopped playing cod6 mw2 in 2009 because I just didn't enjoy it
The dislike for skill based matchmaking is sooooo alien to me as a counter strike and fighting game player. It really sounds like people who THINK they are cracked at a game , just because they stomp legit casuals who almost do not play the game and are mad when they are shown „you are actually not that special , we have thousands of players at your skill level, you are not the 0,1 percent „pro“ that you thought you are.“
don't believe Activision for a second, I play mw3 a couple of hours a day and my lobbies are always sweaty. Activision will do anything to protect their dirty mistress sbmm. If not, why is it patent. Honestly they should go back to connection-based matchmaking. Playing call of duty since 2008 I never had my hand held and protected, I got slammed until I learned how to get better. I know some of you disagree with this notion, but I think there is a space for games that require skill to play and games that do not. Everything is not for everybody.
Being old enough to have played shooters over a decade before SBMM was invented, I sometimes wonder how we did it back then. We cursed like sailors if we got demolished but we accepted that there's always better players and that's that. I totally get how SBMM on the whole is good for the bottom line of publishers and most people's experience but what I will never get is players expecting to have a good time by never going against sweatlords while playing a skill based game in the first place. Just let people choose between SBMM and unranked. Not that hard. SBMM in Cold War was fine for me and in MW2 I hated it passionately. No idea what goes on with Activision sometimes.
I don’t want to crap on anyone or be crapped on. I want a well balanced game where we are neck and neck the whole time. Where strategy and teamwork is the winning factor, not a couple of sweats abusing mobility and broken guns
A bunch of people who think they’re PRO level who destroy noobs and it makes them feel good get butthurt when they play people on their own skill level, they don’t dominate and they don’t get to feel good about themselves.
or maybe they want randomized matchmaking and not a system that dictates when they should be able to have good games. Dont punish me because I improved.
@@Krazyman5150ninja How are you being punished by being matched with people of your own skill level (or slightly higher)? This is like pitting a high school team against a college team. You're not being punished, you're being pushed to better your skill against others and should you win, you are that much more refined. A trained athlete doesn't get to just dunk on someone learning how to play. I think society as a whole has a name for the ones that do, it's an ahole.
@@EtherD86 What is the actual incentive to get good at the game if you are not good by comparison? That's the point he's making. You're not "good at the game" you are always _average_ even if you are more skilled.
@@EtherD86 Because that’s extremely sweaty gameplay. Its repetitive and boring. Who on Earth wants to play against clones of themselves every match? Where is the fun in that? The original fun in multiplayer was the randomness. Not knowing what you are about to face. You may run into sweats… gods.. casuals.. or noobs. That is where the fun was had. It felt authentic and genuine. Nowadays… you have an algorithm that’s dictating when you will play good.. when you will win matches… “Uh oh .. this guy has had 3 straight good games… time to place him in a sweat lobby”. Thats insanity
This is because lower skill players have been pandered to by sbmm for so long so they won’t tolerate higher skilled players in their lobbies anymore. This is the problem. Before you had to ”toughen up” and get better at the game if you played against a sweat on the opposing team. And this would result in BEATING the higher skilled players sometimes. This spirit is what has been lost and people don’t recognise it
The problem is people don't want to play against people similar in skill because they lose Their wusses... If they don't care then just lose I thought you didn't care What it really is about is they want to win against people who barely play but they aren't man enough to admit it If you didn't care you wouldn't be complaining I used to exclusively play hardcore team death match mode on cod mw2 2009 and cod mw3 2011 and then I joined the army and saw enough death to where I only play pve games But that's just me
Funny enough, cod mobile had a good system back in the day. Playing within certain ranks makes the games be on a spectrum. Sometimes you dominate and others you get destroyed. In Xdefiant my first 5-6 matches I wasn't able to breath. I immediately uninstalled the game.
I find it baffling that this has to be explained.... If people want cannon fodder why don't they just play PvE games and set it to easy? Imagine a singleplayer game had no balancing and sets you up against an endboss right after the intro - the uproar! But hardcore PvP player seem to think the world is theirs..
I find it baffling that it had to be explained to you that going and playing a pve game on easy mode is not fun for people. Comparing that to multiplayer games is idiotic. Why would we want to stomp every game? Do you not realize how boring that would be? Perhaps you're like 8 years old and your first cod was MW2019 cause there's no way in hell you played the games prior
@@raidengoodman8754 so you want to destroy noobs, but u want to feel as if it was hard ? am i right ? (i played since the first cod if u think the info is relevant)
"Imagine a singleplayer game had no balancing and sets you up against an endboss right after the intro" I don't need to imagine it. The player fighting an unkillable boss early on is a very common game plot. Also, the "uproar" wasn't really an uproar when Elden Ring did it with that horse boss.
@@raidengoodman8754 Oh, you're one of them... personally offended by another opinion... You know, you can chose the difficulty or your opponent in most PvE games according to your skill and level of fun you want to have, right? This is kinda the point of it. And many PvE games are much harder than PvP. But you want to shoot other people to feel elevated and better than other people, not to compete against yourself. The tone of your response is proof.
I think ppl could be conditioned to both. Having no sbmm is really more rewarding as a player because you can learn how to get better,but if the noob or casual just leaves, then you end up playing against better players like you showed. A fix for that,they can have things for players to improve with. So the engagement stays.( they have some,like private matches). On the other hand, higher skill players could agree to play with sbmm,but what turns them off the most is the cheaters. A higher skilled player has gone through the ropes of learning and improving and knowing how to deal with the dynamics of a match,but when there are cheaters in the lobby that makes them not want to try because it's unfair. Because of them being turned off, they perfom worse. A fix for all of this could be just a really good anti cheat,which they could afford.
I get constantly curb stomped with SBMM. I get like 3-4 kills on average and death in the doubles digits. I very very rarely get a good game. Been like that since MW2019. So much so, I don't even play Call of Duty anymore. SBMM is broken
I also think without SBMM that its easier for people to leave faster, if you lose a game where you went 8/12 and the guys on the other team went 16/7 that probably wont get you to quite for the night because it was close, but if you go 1/17 and the other team has a guy going 43/3 then yea im done after 1 game cause dying over and over for 5 minutes ruins the game, not just the match
@@jeremybrown9611 He can’t he’s talking out of his ass, but what I think he means is that the happier you are the more likely you’re playing more and the more you play the more money cod makes from whales who want to spend money
@@nawab256 My ass speaks the truth :) That's the point of these systems. More likely to buy skins and spend money if the matchmaking is tailored in a way that will make you come back.
The thing with cod is, it’s a casual playlist and with sbmm it’s not casual we are just playing ranked without any rewards or an actual rank to show. Sbmm is fine if it’s separate
I remember for rocket league there was an issue where a lot of top level freestylers were intentionally losing casual games just so they smurf and freestyle on lower ranked players because it became impossible to do in their own lobbies. Eventually psyonix forced them into a higher mmr or banned players who kept doing it. You also have it in call of duty where everybody knows what sbmm or engagement based matchmaking is now. They will intentionally just afk a few games just to game the system and absolutely dominate people in their lobbies. I know of a hell of a lot of people that do this because you are always going to have these people that are going to want to destroy other people in games. Difference was back in the day those games were random. You weren't guaranteed to get a lobby where the average mid tier player would stomp everybody else whereas now you can just game the system. Especially when you just have the one playlist it's easier to do. I used to also just find the games more fun back then as there was more randomness to the teams. You had a mix of low, mid and higher skilled players on each team so even if you were bad yourself you still might face someone at your level but now every game you play you are forced to play carbon copies of yourself constantly. You do super well because you are using an assault rifle? Cool we'll put you against higher skill players. You switch to a sniper for a couple games and get demolished setting you back lower than you were before. You switch back to an assault rifle and just stomp people again because you were punished for experimenting. At least something like overwatch has separate queues for tank, dps, healer etc. When everything is piled into just the one playlist it becomes hell. Balancing in games is not something that is going to be an easy fix but I don't think doubling down on sbmm is the right answer. I think we need to add more options and ways for dealing with balancing There isn't a one size fits all answer as there are so many aspects to balancing a game and truthfully it can't ever be truly balanced. You will always have people trying to game the system. People with fragile egos that can't accept losing one game. New 8 year olds that have never played a game in their life. Professional players on alt accounts or who have intentionally de ranked just so they can hit clips. People Having off days where they aren't performing to their best ability. People having good days where they are performing way above their ability. People trying to experiment with new weapons or classes. There are just so many variables and I feel there won't ever be a one size fits all approach. At least diversify the playlists and try give an option to people instead of just sticking them with one or the other.
@@monstermarc227 so repeatedly it’s the best selling, but Sbmm gets worse? Why because the top what 5k players are tired of playing against each other? If it’s selling like you said then obviously it’s working.
You don't really understand the issue, it's not matching good players into a pool against each other, it's building two teams with similar mmr and artificially capping win loss at 50%. So it finds a team with an MMR of, arbitrarily, 1.0 AND THEN if your MMR is a 3 it has to put you on a team of MMR well below 1 to average your MMR to the other teams. But in reality the entire game is on your shoulders if you're the one that's above the average, the further you are above the average the more you're punished. You have to sweat your balls off every match to even have a chance to win the game because your team has considerably lower skill than anyone on the other team. It isn't fun, add ranked day one and make it functional, have social playlists where I don't have to use meta weapons every round.
it is me being played at a higher level, the sweats still having an easier lobby, is it me being perceived as a valid challenge to sweats, or is my game being changed so that noobs can get me a few more times? the problem is, YOU WILL NEVER KNOW. you'll never know if you're kill was legit, you'll never know if you won because ttk changed or because you shot well, you'll never know if you were precise cause damage changes, you'll never know how good you really are since the sweats might be getting penalised when they face me. it's an absurd place to be in, one that has no place in anything remotely competitive (not competitive as the ranked mode or for a prize, competitive simply means it's you vs someone else). and the biggest joke is that teams are still unbalanced as if we haven't had balancing done right since 2009. this is pathetic
@@Im_helplesswell their sbmm was like other shooters and games: a wide range for normal and a stricter range for ranked. But it changed at COD AW, they changed something in their sbmm to make it stricter in normal too and it was chaos and since then nothing has changed. This problem is COD only, for exemple league of legends they do a wide range for normal play ( bronze can play against Diamond and Diamond can play against Challenger) and a stricter range (ranked). Other shooters does the same as Riot and this was kinda done before league too. Idk what Activision did but they have only themselves to blame
I just feel like this is a “And in other news, water is wet” kind of thing where it feels very obvious to me that randomly matching with players grossly out of your league will be less fun. But it does interest me that only the highest skilled players hate this. Like, the idea of being one of the best among the best really ruins the fun factor of gaming. Is the point where you run out of things to learn it hampers the experience? Is it a restrictive meta?
the problem with SBMM, is that it doesn't help you progress, or if it does it, so slowly it's painful in itself, by placing you with people only at your skill level, you won't ever have that frustration of being crushed and wanting to improve, or checking someone precisely to see how they play, what they do differently etc, back in my days on PC shooters you learned the hard way, and you progressed faster for it.
Problem with SBMM is the sweats vs sweats, MidS vs Mids and Noobs vs Noobs and with that you have EVERY category struggling and not having a good time every or most games bc you're playing against people on your kevel every time. I prefer having saying like 6 or 7 good or half decent matches and being slammed 3 times vs having to struggle every game
i think it should be a thing but a seperate mode/queu where you sign up for it so there’s no complaints if you get stomped on as you can still go back to the mode that has it
Not having skill-based matchmaking is ridiculous. If you're a high-skilled player, you should play against other high skilled players. This is coming from someone who is very competitive by nature. Do you put high school baseball teams against major league baseball teams? Wanting to play against weaker or beginner players is a poor attitude. All these "high-skilled players" should be ashamed. Pathetic.
I believe the best method to deal with this dilemma is to learn from MGO 2 (MGS4). What made that online approachable to all players is that there are lobbies based on one’s skill level. There will be lobbies for advanced, noobs and the middle. There will also be lobbies where it is pure casual where it will not affect your skill level score; really great for practice and just goofing off. Another thing that was cool was your level is earned by exp points but rather how well you play.
I'm getting tired of content creators trying to defend SBMM, it's a bad practice and everyone would much rather have ranked than "pseudo ranked in casuals" and then false-ranks in Ranked. 05:10 This _perfectly_ illustrates how bad SBMM actually is and how much it encourages smurfing, because this scenario wouldn't even happen unless Ayden was forcibly put into that group. (A normal game would have at least a few reasonable contenders to skilled players.) 06:38 The argument made in this video is "If a skilled player dominates then the majority has a worse time" but this isn't true. There are plenty of examples of this in older games without SBMM that had didn't have burnout because of "skilled players doing good" and nobody was complaining that some guy had a 4.0 k/d. Luke misses the point, the problem isn't that "one player does good" it's that you see that one player and you want to _be that good_ . 15:50 "Low/mid tier players don't bother playing that playlist" Yeah they do. Luke what are you even talking about? "Casual" match is more than ranked in total players for every single game that has _ever_ given it as a reasonable option.(the game has to have a decent player base to split in the first place) 17:50 "I just don't understand how you counter the data" The most long running games of all time with a high playerbase didn't use skill base matchmaking. Luke I think the problem here is you're using modern COD and not any game that refutes that. it's a pure sample bias you're having. Also: Believing Activision at their word is just incredibly naive Luke... SBMM is usually the flag that signifies a game won't last. It creates annoying matches, nobody likes to play sweats all the time, and any positive you can attribute to SBMM you could have just thrown to a Ranked Mode and it would do it _better_ . Sorry Luke, I like your vids but it's just a terrible understanding of the subject.
I actually feel like this is also wrong. Many older games just had servers you could join from a list of options. Essentially this would be the none skill based game modes because it literally has no matchmaking. So I'd say keep everything you have right now which is essentially none ranked and ranked, but add community servers or something similar to that like in cs and a few other games. Then all the people wanting a more casual experience can have it and it can also be fun for more skilled players so they can go and crush pugs if they want.
"it's a pure sample bias you're having." As ur entire argumentation ? i cant disagree more with all ur points, u guys are just a noisy minority of people complaining about sbmm......
A proof of the perception you mentioned is two guns in an old game called Return to Castle Wolfenstein: The MP 40 and the Thompson. Everyone thought the Thompson did more damage than the MP 40 because the gunsho had more bass compared to the MP 40, but it turns out they had the exact same damage values.
As someone who doesn't play multiplayer games, I don't understand the controversy behind skill-based matchmaking. You would think online players would *want* to play against others of similar skill levels or ranks. Or are competitive multiplayer people just built different and need that random chance to enter a match and get shit-canned so hard by a single person that they can't even leave their spawn point?
You're right, we *do* wanna play against others with similar skill levels. Just not in every match and not artificially in the unranked modes. Having to sweat every match is equally as unfun as noob stomping every match because it just gets boring and frustrating
As a fighting game player i find this entire thing funny. The day i cry over losing to a better player would be the day i hang up my gaming hat. If you dont want to sweat in a pvp game, why not just play something thats single player? Thats why i have my non competitive games sitting there for when i want chill. But when i hop online to play other people im not gonna get upset if that other person was just better than me. That other player actually motivates me to be better "im not losing to that shit again" Maybe im missing something to be honest, who knows. This whole debate is just wild from my point of view.
@@Toomsday94You guys are clueless, in fighting games you aren’t playing with a team. You didn’t lose cause the other guys were better in CoD, you lose cause SBMm gave you bad team mates. We often slay out and still lose. You are out of your depth.
I used to think SBMM was terrible but after years of experiencing it and then playing games without it i realize how it has made online environments better for game to game experience. Because without it the variation between games is way too high and it does lead to people leaving because those that get blown out quit which will inevitably lead to nothing but derats anyway. I can understand wanting easier matches from time to time but the long run i do see now how SBMM has been better for overall experience.
The people that complain about SBMM don't want a balanced game, they want to dominate every game because they can't handle losing. No one should ever listen to those people.
brain dead take, i just want the fun times from bo2, sbmm (the way its implemented) forces your lobby to disband instead of staying and potentially getting better against the people you're already playing. I used to be so bad at bo2 but i got better as I kept playing against the same people adapting to their playstyle, when the game forces you to play against new people constantly you dont get better, the people that were already good stay good and the people that are bad stay bad, im decent enough to keep above just barely a 1.0 k/d in some of the newer games (cold war, vanguard and mw22) and i have not improved, i get lucky every now and then drop some big killstreaks but those times are rare and therefore most of the time the game is just un-rewarding, cod's sbmm is bad game design. If i were to flip your argument in the same radical way just opposite it would look like this. "The people that want to keep sbmm in unranked dont want a balanced game, they just want to stay at the top of the leaderboards giving no newcomers a chance to get as good or have any fun. No one should ever listen to these people." The truth is, in new cod's you have to play like its your job to see any noticeable change, but people just want to wind down and relax after a stressful day, if I win 3 good matches in a row the game puts me in double or more losing matches in a row and I feel like I haven't improved at all.
Finally, someone giving the voice to the normal players. Most RUclipsrs who play games for a living are inevitably in the top teir of players so have the point of view of the top teir players. As a casual player it sucks when you get in a lobby with a reverse booster who destroys everyone
This is such an NPC cope statement and it’s tired. Everyone is a sweat to a scrub, and scrubs always parrot this BS non point. Also anyone with friends know SBMm is bad regardless of skill.
With no SBMM 100% of players can improve their own game experience by getting better and it provides incentive to play. With sbmm, your experience will get worse as you improve so there's no incentive to.
The thing is, even myself, as a casual player who isnt the best at video games I still dont have a good time. Everytime I load into a match it seems to be like a lottery on if the game is going to go really well, or really poorly. I would rather have a consistent experience. I remember in the times of MW2 where you would just get a consistent experience, sure you get smashed but you work your way up and you can see valuable progress. With the way SBMM is done nowadays its just an inconsistent experience, if you get paired up with people who are bad you dominate, then the next game you get dominated yourself. Its the lack of consistency that personally made me stop playing.
Exactly bro. I would say I’m above average but it’s such a damn lottery experience with how cod has been handling the matchmaking every since MW 2019. This HAS NEVER BEEN AN ISSUE for all the cod games from cod 4 to black ops 4. Advanced warfare had SBMM at the beginning but was quickly turned down because it made no sense to have it in public matches. Modern cods public matches is just ranked 24/7 for every single player. Activision is just a greedy company like anybody else and just want easy money from the causals at the end of the day.
@@iPqko I completely agree with you man, just their way to make money. And yea I stopped buying cods after black ops 4 onwards bc it was just so bad, you cant get a consistent experience so its just more of a turn off. Havent touched cod properly in years now, i assume lots of people have done the same but the fanbase that they do have just spend a shit ton of money so it doesnt matter to them. Wouldnt be surprised if their player numbers are like 10-20% of what it was in peak cod.
@@hasal8747 I still play cod because i just can’t let go of the franchise and i really don’t suck at it. I just think Activision simply just want to have so much money the fastest way possible so they just completely changed the matchmaking when MW 2019 came out. People are gonna say to go play ranked in cod and yes I don’t mind playing ranked but it has the exact same issue just like pubs with the team balancing. It is such a lose lose situation man.
@@iPqko Yea for real, I think they just need to make either that they scale the SBMM WAYYY back to make it more manageable and predictable (even if its keeping lobbies, cause I loved that shit back in the day when u lowkey beefing w someone haha). Or they just remove it entirely and make ranked, you cant have both, makes it a hellhole
I think there is more to it including Microtransactions. I play mp tdm with solos (most no skins, some with skins) getting matched against a sweaty clan (full cosmetics). I have heard they will push paying players with people with no skins to promote buying skins. I have a good time with the casual team cause we play for fun, but after so many sweaty matches against clans it just gets boring. And it's constant, back to back match's, I get solos and the other team a group. Can be a coincidence. I remember when they would match group sizes so it would always be even.
This is the biggest strawman video take of SBMM ffs Nobody is saying they want sweats with 4 KDs to be put in lobbies with sub 1 KD players, thats just absurd. What people mean by no SBMM is allow VARIANCE to occur within matchmaking. Some good players and some bad players mixed in the lobby, not a one sided mess of gods vs ants. The problem with SBMM is that it causes every game and every match to feel the same and its boring af. People want a return of old matchmaking where some players in a match were easier and some were harder to kill and as a result create rivalries to try and take out the top dog. Now I will say the issue with modern CoD isn't entirely the fault of SBMM but rather a combination of it and forced disbanding lobbies as the constant reshuffling of players creates an anti social environment where you cant even form a good rivalry or bond with players.
No the problem is he also is the bottom of the bottom skill level becouse he never realy plays shooters ever so his view from the out side is kind of biosed .
Never understood the hate for SBMM. It literally makes the most sense. Even with it on, there are games where I’m just better and other games where I’m absolute dog water compared to the others. Nice change of pace is always nice. Keep the game interesting.
Smurfing is an issue. No ranked matchmaking is basically they want free smurfing. This will break the balance and alienate the players who lose all the time and eventually kill the game. Casual modes in fighting games are unplayable because skill based matchmaking is off. The only solution to have fun is ranked mode this way you will face people in your skill level. Also entry skill level is important Titan fall is dead franchise because the movement system is so crazy it had such high bar skill level it became parkour game and not a shooter, even the titans were became useless gamic. The game was sold as shooter with cool titans but what we got was parkour game.
Those companies invest fortunes in consumer behavior, studying and then making moves to take the market, the issue is people don't care, they just buy and shame others, just saying "don't buy cod" or something like that and they jump with the "stfu broke Boi" card. Nothing will change 😂
That's basically what happened with CS2 matchmaking. Every second game you're playing vs cheater, and result is fully dependent on which team has more cheaters... Everyone stopped playing MM, nobody wants to be a destroyed spectator
The lack of SBMM will be xdefiants ultimate downfall. A lot of people getting turned off the moment they leave the beginner playlist and it has a terrible leavers problem. Worse than COD. I assume its because people are frantically looking for lobbies they wont get anhilated in. Reckon itll struggle to maintain a healthy playerbase as the skill gap widens
The irony of sweaty players telling everyone to get good while complaining their matches are to hard. Lmao
Well, their matches won't get easier or harder regardless of how good they are with SBMM
So if everybdy get better than everybdy is sweaty so it wont matter 😂 point is most of us dnt wanna play the sweats but the sweats wanna play us so they can break records why would casual want tht? Makes no sense @@Set451
I dont remember that “one guy in the lobby” going off as being a problem back then but then again i was a kid and was still capable of having fun even when losing
That's it.... ppl wanna be good when they are garbage. That's why luke has this opinion with every game. Casue he gets cooked in EVERY GAME. Read the percentages and do the math... it barely comes out to a 1 or 2 kill increase for bad players
Smurfing is not liked by 99% of people, it's a problem now with a lot of games.
People need to have fun playing games, being dependent on wining for fun is a zero sum game.
Being dependent on the misery of others for your own enjoyment is a zero sum game.
@@Maruun1986 You can’t win without someone being a loser. If being a loser in a game hurts that much, grow up…
@@Outright__ difference between losing 1 game because the dude was barely better than you vs losing 5 games in a row to smurfs. Your a loser if the only way you can feel good about yourself is too beat people who don't know how to play....
@@dinodj5 Having any manipulation in matchmaking allows smurfs use it against it. Why I never got the argument that I want to roll over a bunch of casuals. If I ever I wanted to do that I can do it much easier now with SBMM. The fact I don’t want to lower my stats in the first place shows I’m only here to play a game and not a sweat fest like everyone calls it.
But sometimes people have to Smurf because their friends aren’t good enough to rank up for example my friend is terrible at cod he’s realistically silver but playing with me he got to platinum once I get to crim I can’t play with him and have to make a new account
See the main issue that I see is that these games don't understand balancing the teams. This is why I advocate for lobbies staying instead of the lobbies disbanding after one match. If the lobby is still there after the match, there can be a system that balances the teams after every match to make the game feel more different. I don't know how it'll work for squads since that might be harder to control but having lobbies stay instead of disbanding might help team balancing every match.
Edit: I feel like this might solve the sbmm issue because the only reason why the older games were so much more fun is because the lobbies didn't disband after every match and there was a system that rearrenges teams to balance the next match. Plus it might make games feel more like a community so I see no downsides to this unless it uses peer to peer matchmaking
This would result in the same issues, especially in cases when one team is getting stomped. This data just show cod players don't now what they want other then not lose
lobbies disbanding was one of the worst decisions they made, nothing more fun than having a good rivalry going on over like 10 games against a specific team especially if the lobby was a full team vs full team
the same way it did before. It keeps squads together but balances the rest. hardly would you ever PUB into a match where both teams are more then 2-3 people on the same squad. so its not really an issue. If you squad is the one with the weak link it doesnt count for that because of your other members.
Battlefield Bad Company 2, BF3 and 4 had that, that you or the game will make teams balanced if anyone leaves or the teams don't have enough players
Back in the server days some games auto balanced teams, if someone did super well (above average) they got swapped to the losing team
The problem I have with how Activision has been implementing SBMM lately is that when I have one good game, the algorithm will put me in with high skilled players in the next one. Then i get curb stomped. Then after that match i get put in with lower skilled players. It's that back and forth i have an issue with. And I've always been a crap to mid tier player. But i always had fun and could play for hours on end in the days of Black ops, BO2 and MW3. Yes they had a level of SBMM but it wasn't as noticeable back in the day.
Dude it's the same base game you've played self admittedly for hours at at time at points for over nearly a decade...... maybe you just need to do something else for a bit.
I think its a result of no lobbys being kept. I could play for hours with the same lobby of 12 all night or one or two rotating out. PLUS it balanced the teams.
@@patrickmcpartland1398 wow you really got him with that one.
Exactly 💞
@@patrickmcpartland1398What a stupid comment that doesn’t address anything.
I still don't buy it. I'm literally the 90s kid that grew up with the very beginning of online play and the birth of franchises like Halo and COD. Never once was it an issue in the past. Lobbies stayed, teams were almost always automatically balanced, save for the odd squad that would come in and just wreck house, but even then you could just leave the lobby and be rematched with other players, and so would that squad. I don't know, I feel like the online infrastructure has gotten so much worse, from match making capabilities to chat capabilities, it's all much worse than it was during the 360 and PS3 era.
Agreed. I think that some of the ridiculous streaks (gunship that can be glitched and was never patched, and strafe run in CW for example) are just annoying, and with the strafe, it's much too low of a score to obtain (can kill the whole team multiple times). That contributes to some rage-quitting for sure. No good ground streaks in CW either.
True, my best guess most of the people supporting this have grown up on these balancing systems and can't accept it works without. But there's an even better solution: create a sbmm and a random playlist. You play what you want and everyone is happy but no it has to be only one. Such polarized world.
@@Blockhead2 Yep. There's a level of conditioning that is unreal. If you do well for a few games...now your ping is 90ms+ and the lobby is stacked against you.
It's cause in the early days everyone was a noob. Now, there are players who have played fps for decades, and players who are just starting. The skill gap is way bigger than it used to be
@@cftncfjlphgfb SBMM tends to penalize the players that have been playing for decades. 90ms ping and teammates that don't really go to OBJ etc. I'm all about helping new players, yet when 5 are on my team at once, it's going to be a loss almost every time.
There is a difference between playing a match and losing and having the game give you a match specifically designed to MAKE YOU LOSE. Its logically flawed. Old cods didn't need this system to be the biggest games on the planet.
yea as someone who's a tryhard and quite good at cod having my team be worse than the other team by design just because i "balance" the teams isn't fun
im not having fun cus if i don't do everything we lose, my team isn't having fun cus they're getting shit on by a superior team and the other team isn't having fun because they're getting shit on by one person
@@Im_helpless exactly this bro. I be wondering sometimes why I an averagely good player has to do everything for my team that's not as good. While the other team has like 2 or 3 people that are tryharding like there life depends on it.
Old COD games had skill based matchmaking as far back as Black Ops 2 iirc it was just a lot less oppressive than it is in the post MW2019 era
I keep seeing this point buts it’s a false notion. That game you get assigned to “intentionally lose,” is just a jump in skill. If you failed the test in skill, you should be extra appreciative of SBMM lol you essentially get a taste of what it’d be like and then get upset you’ve been spared prior
Exactly. It's complete bs to go 35-8 and still get absolutely annihilated because your teammates are a bunch of jackasses
People don't like competitive games. They think they do but they don't, want they really like is winning, they want all the trappings of competition without the hard bits. They'd rather play a 100 matches against bad players win 100 and log off thinking they are Gods, instead of 1 match against someone who will give them a bit of trouble
That entitlement mindset lmaoo 🤡🤡
That’s facts
But that literally cod mo is lobby stomping, Activision and new cod fans turned it into something it not like a competitive fps zombies is literally their second most popular mode which proves it was never supposed to be competitive
Exactly, that’s why players should play against players of their caliber then right?
Idgaf bout sbmm….I stopped playing mw3 often cause of the hacker infestation
The problem with how Activision implements SBMM is that it's meant to optimize engagement over anything else, and the way it does it is actually really scummy. The casual playlist out the gate have SBMM. Casual is supposed to be less competitive by nature, but if you're a good player that just means every lobby you get put into will be filled other players exactly like you. In a playlist where it's supposed to be low stakes, they make it extremely competitive with no incentive to win. If you were to have a poor performance in that match, the game then uses an algorithm to put you in a lobby with worse players than you so you can get back into the lobby you were previously in, and the same goes with if you're a lower skill player and you have a good match. All this to mean that you're never actually getting better at the game, because the game is always going to nake sure you're going up against players equal to your skill, and if you're already not that good of a player, then there's no reason to actually get better at the game. So is all so they can optimize engagement, which in turn will hopefully get players to buy their extremely overpriced A.I. generated bundles, which unfortunately will work unless players wake the hell up and realize what Activision is doing. Players are having high hopes for BO6, and I'm calling it now, most of the stuff they're adding is either going to be a gimmick or be underwhelming.
They will never sell you a game so good that you won't be next years title.
And you keep buying it and crying about it
"because the game is always going to make sure you're going up against players equal to your skill", isn't that just how mmr/elo system works in general? MOBAs and tactical shooters been doing it for decades and it's a non-problem there. And yes, mmr/elo still exists in non-ranked/casual matches in those games, if not then new players would just get steamrolled every single time. I don't play COD, but is the game that casual that the idea of proper matchmaking scares the players?
@@asddapidk how my 1.4kd means I have to go against cunts that are nearly 3.0kds. Sbmm does not fairly match you with players your skill at all. To top that off it makes my ping got up to 100ms when I’m using Ethernet
@@asddap There is a differents you can have no sbmm but still have skill balancing thats what fps have done for ages . When you got into a lobby after that the game balances teams but never looks at you as a player befor to match you against other players that have all the same stats as a player as you . The problem is for years now bad players have been shiled from beeing bad when you throw them into 1 playlist were they arnt good anymore so there ego gets hit they instantly leave . Removeing sbmm only works if you do it everywere over more then 1 game to chang the culture . Right now COD is basicly play meta only everybody is sweating no matter what no chill is allowed ever becouse you play against a copy of your self every gun fight .
Well said 👍
This is one of the reasons why bots (while sometime frustrating) can be important for video games. That way the dominance of certain players isn't always at the cost of an equal number of players enjoyment
I disagree If u ever played halo infinite and a bot joins its OP 😂 I hope u realize that bot can see thru the map and anticipate your moves if anything if someone leaves the game shouldn't count and the match should have less XP and the person who left needs a 30-1hr ban from playing
Agreed with the caveat that bots should only be used in the lower skill base with lower CPU skill levels. There's no sense in higher level terminator bots.
@@gregviews I hope you're joking...the Halo Infinite bots are a disgrace. It's an instant loss if you have a bot on your team.
@CastisV not all the time it depends on the bot if the bot is above the level of odst it does change the course of the game
@@gregviews Bots in halo infinite are completely useless, all they do is give the opposite team free points. You might as well play against a sack of rice.
I just need them to toss me a bone sometimes. My issue is none of my friends are my skill and now they get punished for paying with me and with cod specifically all quit. I’m now stuck alone to suffer in fake ranked games even though I play pubs. Another example of how it hurts the game a little is a friend wanted to play fortnite last night. They haven’t played it for over a year. The matches we played were identical to the matches I played the day before with a different friend who actually does play a lot and is close to my skill level. My friend last night just kept getting slammed by people and didn’t seem to be enjoying it to much cause they had to learn all this new stuff and play fortnite gods lol it’s just getting exhausting these last few years as a person whose played these kind of games for almost two decades now.
That’s interesting. Because when I hop in a game with my kids I benefit from there being more bots or lower skilled players. But then there would be times we run into players that are way higher skilled than me and then that’s a nightmare cause I gotta try to get my kids to retreat when they’re loosing their minds and getting downed lmao.
People always forget friend groups in these systems. Even Luke didn’t bring this up, I don’t think the paper did either.
@@hammersticks7138 you only benefit soo much, I do play overwatch with firends that are decent but I do have some freinds that haven't touched it in years and when they come play with me they get stompped on and I can only do so much to help them out.
now I don't play shooters but I used to play a lot of league back in the day. I was in challenger soloq but I'd often switch to my gold ranked account when playing normals with my gf who plays league casually and is only in bronze; so that she's not punished when playing with me by players on the enemy team with higher skill level than her, or worse, a player on my skill level playing a meta champ and is actually tryharding; and I could just play for fun regardless whether we win or lose and finally get to try out unconventional builds and playstyles that I couldn't do playing ranked. another reason is that there have been many times where lower ranked players would see my emblem and frame on my challenger account and somehow immediately expect me to always perform on the top level even when playing normals. they'd trashtalk me if I don't carry the team on a normal match which can be ignored on occasion but gets really annoying when it happens a lot.
@@geebeepman Lonely scrubs just can’t understand this. They’ve no skill and no friends.
To me it seems that a lot of people are looking for a single player experience in a competitive multiplayer game.
And they want the developers bend the game for them and them alone
@@delihogg nope we're looking for the classic cod experience that rewarded you for doing well and didn't punish you
@@AmcSTROKE58 what do you mean "punish" you lmao. Its not a punishment to play against people who are similarly skilled as you
@@delihogg Sounds like you suck at COD
@@delihogg it intentionally gives you matches to lose by matching you with players that are better not taking into account different hardware and cheaters
People forget that the older Call of Duty games didn't have a competitive mode. There was no rank system. Players today care way more about their rank and will sweat as hard as they can to achieve that. The reason why you remember old MW2 and Black Ops 1 so fondly was because people literally didn't sweat as much back then. The skill ceiling has been raised across the board. I can feel it with Overwatch. A typical platinum game in OW1 back in 2016 is like mid Silver now in OW2. Lots of people are chasing that internet fame, they wanna become big streamers. There are money incentives now. Twitch wasn't a thing back then, and esports was a fraction of what it is today. Gamers are sweating more than ever. Doesn't matter which rank, everyone is try harding these days, and I don't think that was as prevalent back in 2007-2010
Peopl back then did sweat as much the differents is you coud releaxe knowing not everybody is the same skill tier you had games you go fucked and games you fucked so peopl were not allways going full meta sitting in a corner mode . With sbmm you know everybody is like you if you go into a gun fight the only differents you will make is hardrunning the meta loadouts and getting peopl from behind by camping . Its how COD has shaped its culture not that peopl have become more sweaty
They did have a competitive mode back then
The thing is, people who are frustrated with Skill Based Matchmaking and are informed do not ask for it to be switched off; they ask for it to be toned down - more balanced matchmaking. My experience playing Halo Infinite - which 343 admitted had strong SBM - was a slog and frustrating for me. I'm a pretty average player, but I don't want to play competitively; I don't want to be a professional gamer or have an experience akin to that and so I only play to have fun. But strong SBM constantly matches me with players that are above me to give me highly competitive games for my level in order for me to improve. If every game is me fighting for my life, that's not fun. There should be variety; some games should feature players at a lower levels than me so I can have a relaxed game. That's what ultimately stopped me playing Halo Infinite: the game was no longer relaxing and was constantly a highly competitive experience.
So I don't want to play games with people ten skill levels higher or lower; I want games with people two or three levels higher or lower - more balanced. Strong SBM or no SBM is not balanced.
It's kinda sad we actually need legit research papers to prove SBM makes everyone but the top 10% happier but if there's one thing we can count on, it's gamers will always be mad at everything but themselves
I remember old battlefield games where you would get trapped in the spawn because the other team was way over powered.😂 it’s funny but not every match haha
Oh yea that was amazing. And awful lmao. In Battlefield 2 on PC I was devastating in the jets. On gulf of oman, trapping the american team on the carrier then using that bomber that had 5 bombs in it was crazy. The explosions were outrageous back then too. I remember several times getting like 20 kills at a time as they waited for a helicopter or something to spawn in. Also back then the gun on the carrier was a person in it, not AI and you could destroy it. So I'd purposely fly in aiming straight at the gun blowing it up before it could even see me. Then circle around and wreak havoc on the carrier lol.
See, PUB stomping was fun. Now every match is a sweat fest and rage inducing.
i just left those games because they were boring as hell for both sides
@@noodles9345 haha I might have been one of those ship gunners 😂
@@panzer00pub stomping is fun until all the pubs quit and your game is dying cause they keep getting stomped.
I don't play competitive FPS games, but I can give an example of how some players just want to spend all their time just griefing less experienced players. About a year after Elite Dangerous came out, some players just started hanging around the starter systems in tooled up ships, basically just to trash newbs, over and over again. Myself and a few online mates set up a little group that patrolled these systems and defended the newer players from these attacks, and it was quite obvious that they didn't want to actually play the game, and most of the time rage quit rather than get into a fair (ish - I wasn't that good! But they didn't hang around to find out, just dropped connection) fight. They then went online and whinged in the forums that we were ruining their "piracy" playstyle! I can only imagine the situation in much worse these days.
I just remember the days where some matches you get blown out, some matches you wipe the other team, sometimes it’s a really good balanced match. The experience itself was balanced out. NOW if you happen to have the rare game that you win the next 10 games you get stomped on, it drastically shortens my (and everyone one I know) playtime.
Games need to go back to its roots. Bring back lobbies. You can scope out who's in the lobby and have the choice to leave or ready up beforehand. You know if you ready up aginst people youre better than youll get the win and a little XP. If you decide to ready up with the sweats you know you might lose but will get hella XP.
XDefiant already has this. It's great.
@@xMontorix xp isn’t that important in cod.
Sweats are the worst thing to happen to online gaming. It's not fun to lose HARD every match. It's not fun learning to becoming a sweat for a game. It's not fun playing as a sweat and sweating the entire time to min max your gameplay. It's just boring, which is the opposite of why people play games in the first place. It's a form of entertainment. If it's not entertaining then it's just a waste of time.
i think u didnt play sports. its an outlet to get your competitive juices out after high school/college athletics.
If the sweats want to win with no effort, they should just play solo against bots. What they actually want is to stroke their own egos by stepping on other players.
@@blarghmcblarghson1903 what do you think playing competitive games is about…..
When Microsoft introduced Hourglass PvP system to Sea of Thieves some time ago, I remember my win ratio was above average.
But these days my win ratio is abysmally low, and the only reason I can think for that is that a huge chunk of the game's playerbase have either quitted the game or don't play Hourglass anymore. So I end up matched against veterans and sweatlords who still play that mode.
And honestly, that game mode ain't fun anymore, so I rarely play it either.
That's the thing, Hourglass was the equivalent to ranked match-making compared to adventure being unranked/casual. However the more toxic part of the community has driven out players so much that they've been spending the last year trying to win the casual fanbase back, and the toxic community doesn't want to accept that reality.
@@AlexiaHoardwingI'm one of those. I used to play in the arena era. I stopped when I only had sweats and now I'm back and I only play in the safer seas. Sweats need Noobs, but Noobs don't need sweats.
Is always funny how the solution of the tryhards devolve into "get at my level", "dont play the game" and "they are tourist anyway", everything because they want to feel good curbstomping people with lifes that don't allowed them to be 5 hours playing games.
Thats not the point of being competitive? Playing a contested games for victory?
Casual playlists do not need SBMM 👍
@@MessinVR Nah it does, otherwise the sweats will kick the casuals from the casual playlist
@@addali150 Nah because XDefiant proves otherwise regardless of what the video said because they dont have evidence saying all the casuals left
The issue here is that, the only bit of data that the paper actually gives regarding any type of player retention shows a 1.75% variant in player return rate which is easily chaulked up to margin of error. Then when they make the bold claim of "no SBMM was worse for everyone and everyone hated it" they provide zero data or evidence to support that statement. All this paper tells me is that SBMM, in the best case senario, improves the likelihood that a player will return to the game by an average of 1%... The entire argument for having SBMM is that it supposedly increases player retention, yet they are specifically ommitting data related to that argument.
What I never understood is what was wrong with the system older games used since forever? Unranked = no skill based matchmaking, ranked = Skill Based Matchmaking of some type.
Well, because no one wants to get curb stomped while queuing into a casual unranked match either. Why should queuing for the sweaty tryhard mode be the solution to that? Seems counterintuitive. So I suppose your solution would have to have two unranked modes, one without SBMM and one with. (Looks like this is addressed at around the 11:00 mark.)
@@ByrvurraThe solution to that already exists. Older cods had sbmm too. It just wasn’t as strict.
The casual mode is where connection should be the major factor in matchmaking with a bit of sbmm to prevent complete landslide outliers.
It all revolves around selling more microtransactions. Activision doesn't care what the players want. They don't even care if they release a good game.
Sbmm has always been in cod
@@Byrvurrajust don't play the ranked mode so sweaty then
Man I love this channel. We need more people that have critical thinking skills and can look at all the info, seeing diff sides and then coming to a logical conclusion, like Luke does. It is rare these days to see it. Love, love your thoughtful non emotional takes. Breath of fresh air.
People are who for getting rid of SBMM are literally ONLY the annoying sweats that don’t have jobs that are bored of not being able to bully people at their skill level. Get a job and play against people your skill level, grow up.
Luke needs a descriptor other than “curb stomp” because I think he said it 37 times this video. He curbed stomped us with the damn phrase itself
I can remember year 2 of destiny 2 when me and the clan that I was in at that time were playing iron banner... We won like 60 rounds of that game mode in a row without losing a single match...
I got my "I made this for you" medal that day wich is a 50 kill streak in a single game without dying.
I also remember that some full enemy teams just left the match because we fought them earlier that day and we literally would win the round before it even started!
We played for maybe 6 or 7 hours and we in the end only stopped because matching times went up until we didnt found anyone anymore for like 30 minutes straight...
So at some point we pissed off basicly every european player so that they just stopped playing ironbanner on pc for a moment!
They make those medals then put in systems to stop you from getting them. Make it make sense. Every time I’m on my way to one, the game is mercy.
I don't completely agree with this logic. OG MW2 and BO2 didn't have SBMM as high as the new COD games and yet those games still maintained high player numbers, they're played in high volume till today. If your logic was 100% those game player numbers would have died off YEARS ago.
I believe there should be some level of SBMM in competitive games like this, the softer players do need lobbies just for them to have fun, but the level at which SBMM has been cranked up to now is insane and it leaves no one satisfied.
If everyone generally plays with people around their level, there is no point for the main reason people play COD, the killstreaks. What is the point of having a 12, 14, or 20 killstreak reward if you're never going to use it?
Making the majority of your game sweaty as well also incentives terrible playstyles, everyone needs to use that one-shot sniper, find the best cheese spots and just wait around in corners just to get a damn radar.
I do not believe any "research" conducted by Activision because they have never been interested in making games that are best for players, its always about what business model they can design to get more money from gamers. A research paper from Activision is like reading research paper from BP discussing the impacts of oil on marine life.
The difference today is the kids
Except you said it yourself. They dont care about how the game feels as long as people like you keep eating up cod slop and logging in. The arguement ends when you log in and tell them they can keep doing whatever they like. Just play xdefiant
@@usucculentcow2988
I haven't played cod since 2019 but Xdefiant has terrible hitreg. I find it borderline unplayable in how bad it is.
I say keep the high skilled players with the high skilled players why would they want to go against casuals. That wouldn't be fun for them. If they want to play against casuals, just to destroy them. Why? All I can think of is so they can refill their big egos, in my opinion
Some want to crush low level players because it ruins the low level players day. It's like how people will go and troll/grief people just because it's fun for them.
They don't really want to play the game, they just want a puppy to kick sometimes.
While there is some truth to what you say, it's understandable from the perspective of a better player as well. There are so many weapons and different builds in MW3, but only two are commonly used because they are the best. It feels like you are forced to use the best options in the game every time. Another issue is that CoD isn't really a competitive game. RNG and timings play too big of a role to justify matchmaking as strict as it is right now. Trust me, even the sweats want to relax sometimes. Their level of play when they are relaxing is still higher than what other players achieve even when they are trying.
I love competitive games. Valorant is my main game, and in that game, I absolutely agree that stomps are not fun, not even for the winning team. Sure, I'll take the Elo, but I want to get out as quickly as possible. Close games are what get your heart going. If the matchmaking didn’t result in close games in Valorant, I don’t think I would play it.
But that's the thing: if you had a skilled-player only lobby, some of them would get curbstomped. Cause there's still skill difference in the top, and somebody's got to lose. But since they are sweaty, they hate to lose even more than casuals and that lasts even less, it's all there in the paper
@@zephr147Funny. I started playing Valorant yesterday, I still don't have the level to play ranked, all the unranked matches I played were stomp. 5 professionals on the other side, me and 5 similar to me in my side. 7 games in a row 13-0 for the other team. I'm just going to uninstall. My team looking at the ground and others afk, the other team 100% accuracy in Headshot. This would be COD without SBMM.
The only reason people talk about SBMM is because streamers cry about it. They wanna look badass on stream with a bunch of kills. It’s why they use vpn’s to try and get bot lobbies. But as a player who plays it for fun. Sbmm is way more fun than getting dropped into a bunch of lobbies with a bunch of try hards.
These sweats are that kinda sweaty sweaty… a sweat that sweats… sweaty…
Personally, I think that if SBMM doesn't include unlocks like guns, attachements and perks, it's less reliable.
I might be wrong, but I have a strong feeling that "available tools" for any given match should be as equal as possible.
Imagine just playing the game to have fun and you wouldn't have to worry about sbmm, but nope people gotta play this game like their life is depending on it and sweat their cheeks off using meta loadouts 24/7 and nothing else
Think the biggest problem with people complaining about things like SBMM is content creators have much more power influencing players than they think. Best example I can think of is Destiny where we had content creators saying it's too easy and all their fans agree cause "well he/she is good at the game so they know that they're talking about" but when they experience things that are harder they hate it. COD is just another example of you have like high tier skill CC's complaining about SBMM so all of their fans agree with them, but once they experience what the high tier wants they hate it.
People with higher skill being mad about SBMM is like being 25 and getting mad about how you can’t play basketball with 7 year olds. That is so pathetic. This is exactly why I quit online competitive games altogether.
ive never met a 25-35 year old thats in their physical prime want to play against 7 years old, what fun is that lmao.
Lmao way to twist the story. A much more accurate comparison would be 25 year olds with some decent skill not liking the fact that instead of playing with average people they're constantly forced to play with NBA pro's because they did decent in a couple of streetball games.
@@nandoman4769 but like that doesn't happen. All these people are on their high horse feeling amazing as they won a couple games - then after actually getting challenged and losing the next match / having to actually try they cry like a man baby that it's too hard. These systems aren't as crazy as people make them out to be, you aren't being put against god incarnated for winning a couple games, your just finally being given a fair fight, stop whining
You dont get it Sbmm makes it more and more competitive for the aver person . If you play against your self every game then what do you think happens of course meta hoeing everygame and alot of camping . Also its bad for the aver person you will never get better you just stay were you are for basicly ever . You quit becouse there is 0 ways to improve with sbmm throwing another copys of you against you . What is the chance that you will run into a insane high skilled player ? .
@@xythiera7255 LOL facts! The OP is an idiot . If you CONSTANTLY play against yourself you will NOT improvel. This is LITERALLY thef acts of life. People don't like to compete. They want participation trophies. NO!! GIT....GUD!! Or at least try. Also one day is insufficient evidence from Activision. Should have dedicated to an entire month.
Like some others have mentioned, lobby persistence would help out tremendously with everything. That way people get a feel for how good people on both teams are and their playstyles. So that they can counter it and such. The way it is now, by time you figure out whos doing what its over and you are thrown into a new match not knowing who is what again. It may still keep things sweaty but at least then you have a reasonable way to play around it.
I don’t think games need “no” skill based matchmaking, but it needs severe reduction from how it is today
This is how I'd change it step by step...
1) Base matchmaking on account rank bracket; If 100 is max rank then 4 categories exist (01 25) (26 50) (51 75) (76 100)
2) As a failsafe for once a playerbase declines; "If 60 seconds pass and the match is not filled, players of other brackets are admitted"
@@keith3278I would base match making on monthly or yearly win rate and if the playerbase is low your lobby can be filled with higher skilled players.
I think the real issue with CoD’s sbmm model is how quickly and strictly players are sorted into their “brackets”, it feels like ping-ponging between hard fought wins and matches you felt destined to lose.
funny thing is, the sweats will play just as hard even against the bad players...but it's more fun for them. They don't want SBMM because it evens the playing field. The only thing I don't like about SBMM is if you have friends of different skill level, it's hard to play together. It's not fun for the people that aren't any good.
yup, and they're not that many, noisy minority of crying babies
They literally don’t play as hard, it just feels the same to a scrub. Most sweats will play with suboptimal load outs for verity sake and still do well.
@@bannedmann4469 tell me the dude in the video that is the pro playing warzone against some normal players, is not trying hard and sweating his ass off in those clips. Streamers just want to crap on worse players for the content.
@@CastisV Nothing he did was that crazy actually, like I said. It just looks like that to you..
@@bannedmann4469 I don't play that shit game, but it looked like your typical try hard crackhead COD player that would complain about SBMM ruining their fun while dumping on normal people that just want to play the game.
The main problem with SBMM is that you get punished for winning and rewarded for losing. What I mean by this is that when you win a match, the matchmaker adjusts to make the next match harder, but if you lose it does the opposite. Most of the people who complain about SBMM are the ones trying super hard to win, which results in an even harder game match after match. It eventually gets to the point where you cannot win no matter how hard you try, and this leads to frustration.
I think there are a lot of people out there who choose to play games like this, which just need to come to terms with the fact that they don't actually enjoy the struggle of competitive pvp games.
THIS! PLEASE SAY IT LOUDER! Some people wanna fit into a group so bad that they deny it just isn't for them. It's like trying to fit a square peg in the round hole. It aint gonna work. Instead of crying to have the manufacturer change that round hole into a square, why don't they just go do something else that interests them? Tens of thousands of people play GTA online probably every week if not every day. Not me. It's not for me and that's okay because it's not the end of the world
Yup! A game for everyone is a game for no one.
THIS! like the guy who just wants to use his rec league softball games to drink with his buddies, but the rest of the guys on the team are taking it really seriously cause their younger and are more competitive
Totally agree !! Just like elden ring ! Because the game is hard does not mean that they have to cater to a "majority" that never touch a souls game in the first place !
I wouldn't call CoD a competitive pvp game, neither would I call Halo that which also suffers from really aggressive SBMM.
Can we all collectively start calling CoD matchmaking what it is? Engagement Optimized Matchmaking. Activision has the patent for it (retention based/engagement optimized) and has been using it since 2019. They reference SBMM, but they are the only company that throws players in lopsided lobbies to keep players gaming. It results in "yo-yo" games, 3-4 close games, 1 gimme match where you're higher a skill than the lobby, and sometimes being thrown to the wolves due to poor team balancing.
I'm curious to check out the document on their matchmaking because they sure don't talk about it or call their matchmaking what it is. I'd be surprised if the document shows that it's a true mmr system.
Have sbmm or have ranked. Not both.
Sbmm should be ranked. Everything else should be casual with random matchmaking.
casual have no sense either without sbmm, problem remains the same
@@robertrogers8519 bro this is it ive said this before but it's perfect
I got attacked online on some big cod youtubers chat for saying that SBMM was a good thing, and here we are. Idiots like those just want easy games, we have seen it time and time again with them playing so much they find exploits and well exploit them, we have seen them using VPNs to access bot lobbies. Its crazy to me that people think SBMM is a bad idea, the only people that do are either sweaty youtubers looking for views, or those who watch sweaty youtubers and take their word as gospel.
You can't trust Activision sir the sbmm they use can literally determine If you hit the target. Their own documents have detailed that they literally make it easier for someone who keeps loosing by giving them more help better aim etc. I can't rock with that. Also I believe the term is EOMM now for Activision
Yeah, Luke was really lazy on this video and topic.
One example, in statistics, if you have 100 players, you could classify them as follows: 10 are very good players, 20 are good players, and the remaining 70 are casual players. In a 6 vs 6, if teams are paired randomly, the probability that you, as a casual player, are on a team with no good or very good players, while the opposing team has at least one good or very good player, is calculated as:
1-[(C64,6)/(C94/6)] => 9.99%
This means that a casual player will experience a “bad match approximately once every 10 matches. Therefore, the skill based matchmaking system is not good for good players and not having the system is not a big deal for casual players.
If any of my calculations are incorrect, I welcome someone to let me know, I did them quickly
Easy fix for me was if I wanted to relax I would either play a PvE multiplayer game or a single player game. Otherwise if I want to play against other players I have to prepare for anything.
So be prepared to play against people your own level. 😂
Someone in r/destinythegame said they didn't like SBMM because when they (high skill players) play with friends, their friends are stuck facing high skill players. So basically they didn't want their friends to experience the very thing that SBMM is meant to prevent for everybody.
The problem is, whichever noob does the least-worst in the noob match, They then get slingshotted up to the insane sweat pros for the next match (because of the SBMM). Then get destroyed and go 1-20, and get thrown back to the noobs again and repeat the cycle.
And it's this whiplash of 'Do good, Get punished'. Win 1, lose 1, win 1, lose 1. Over and over, that people are sick of.
They'd rather just fight pro's when they naturally happen to, and fight noobs when they naturally happen to, without feeling (and knowing) that there's some ai bullish watching and controlling you. and contently going from 0 to 100. Casual to Extreme spawn-killing unplayable insanity.
I’m ok with SBMM, my issue is engagement base match making. If you are adjusting damage values and hit box size that is a problem. Basic SBMM is fine.
People who honestly believe games would be more popular without skill based matchmaking are in incredible denial
Nah bro, I need to play against the best players in the world, otherwise what's the point? ;.;
Lol
Yeah idk it seems like it’s the contrary because everyone’s “skill” isn’t taken to account as much I’m an average player I have a 1.35 and I average 600 spm but 7 out of 10 games I play I’m getting stomped in so it has it’s flaws just need to be more optimized
Believe **
So explain why COD was 100x better without it? Explain why the average player plays COD for a week then stops out of pure hatred.
@monstermarc227 that isn't the average player, the average players plays a few hours a week year round, the people you're thinking of are the 5 percent you hear from on social media all the time who grind the game then complain about SBMM
I played the recent COD MW2 online a bit, definitely casual but I played a lot of of old school MW back in the day. I am not good but consider myself okay, for me the SBMM worked really well. Most matches were close with teams finishing within 10 points of each other, but not sweaty. Granted I would not play more than an hour or so but I never felt I was unfairly matched, just sometimes the players were better which is okay.
All ima say is when I was younger and getting my ass handed to in BO1 MW3 and BO2 I never stopped playing I kept playing to the point where I could hold my own. But I do agree that strict SBMM should only be in ranked and everything should be connection based first with a slight emphasis on SBMM. But like I said I was garbage at one point I kept playing and got better and even dropped my first nuclear on BO3.
Exactly, someone else already asked it but “what was wrong with the system we had before?”
expectations for games are different now. there is so much choice and variety, that many will just play a different game if they are not enjoying one. EDIT although I personally stopped playing cod6 mw2 in 2009 because I just didn't enjoy it
The dislike for skill based matchmaking is sooooo alien to me as a counter strike and fighting game player. It really sounds like people who THINK they are cracked at a game , just because they stomp legit casuals who almost do not play the game and are mad when they are shown „you are actually not that special , we have thousands of players at your skill level, you are not the 0,1 percent „pro“ that you thought you are.“
don't believe Activision for a second, I play mw3 a couple of hours a day and my lobbies are always sweaty. Activision will do anything to protect their dirty mistress sbmm. If not, why is it patent. Honestly they should go back to connection-based matchmaking. Playing call of duty since 2008 I never had my hand held and protected, I got slammed until I learned how to get better. I know some of you disagree with this notion, but I think there is a space for games that require skill to play and games that do not. Everything is not for everybody.
@@Reap_N_SOWGaming the cope is real with this one
Being old enough to have played shooters over a decade before SBMM was invented, I sometimes wonder how we did it back then.
We cursed like sailors if we got demolished but we accepted that there's always better players and that's that.
I totally get how SBMM on the whole is good for the bottom line of publishers and most people's experience but what I will never get is players expecting to have a good time by never going against sweatlords while playing a skill based game in the first place.
Just let people choose between SBMM and unranked. Not that hard.
SBMM in Cold War was fine for me and in MW2 I hated it passionately. No idea what goes on with Activision sometimes.
I don’t want to crap on anyone or be crapped on. I want a well balanced game where we are neck and neck the whole time. Where strategy and teamwork is the winning factor, not a couple of sweats abusing mobility and broken guns
A bunch of people who think they’re PRO level who destroy noobs and it makes them feel good get butthurt when they play people on their own skill level, they don’t dominate and they don’t get to feel good about themselves.
or maybe they want randomized matchmaking and not a system that dictates when they should be able to have good games. Dont punish me because I improved.
@@Krazyman5150ninja How are you being punished by being matched with people of your own skill level (or slightly higher)? This is like pitting a high school team against a college team. You're not being punished, you're being pushed to better your skill against others and should you win, you are that much more refined. A trained athlete doesn't get to just dunk on someone learning how to play. I think society as a whole has a name for the ones that do, it's an ahole.
@@EtherD86 What is the actual incentive to get good at the game if you are not good by comparison? That's the point he's making. You're not "good at the game" you are always _average_ even if you are more skilled.
Sounds like your the one butt hurt 😅
@@EtherD86 Because that’s extremely sweaty gameplay. Its repetitive and boring. Who on Earth wants to play against clones of themselves every match? Where is the fun in that?
The original fun in multiplayer was the randomness. Not knowing what you are about to face. You may run into sweats… gods.. casuals.. or noobs. That is where the fun was had. It felt authentic and genuine.
Nowadays… you have an algorithm that’s dictating when you will play good.. when you will win matches… “Uh oh .. this guy has had 3 straight good games… time to place him in a sweat lobby”. Thats insanity
This is because lower skill players have been pandered to by sbmm for so long so they won’t tolerate higher skilled players in their lobbies anymore. This is the problem. Before you had to ”toughen up” and get better at the game if you played against a sweat on the opposing team. And this would result in BEATING the higher skilled players sometimes. This spirit is what has been lost and people don’t recognise it
The problem is people don't want to play against people similar in skill because they lose
Their wusses... If they don't care then just lose I thought you didn't care
What it really is about is they want to win against people who barely play but they aren't man enough to admit it
If you didn't care you wouldn't be complaining
I used to exclusively play hardcore team death match mode on cod mw2 2009 and cod mw3 2011 and then I joined the army and saw enough death to where I only play pve games
But that's just me
>They just don't want to lose
>The majority don't like SBMM
Well the majority can't all be skilled players, right?
Funny enough, cod mobile had a good system back in the day. Playing within certain ranks makes the games be on a spectrum. Sometimes you dominate and others you get destroyed. In Xdefiant my first 5-6 matches I wasn't able to breath. I immediately uninstalled the game.
I find it baffling that this has to be explained.... If people want cannon fodder why don't they just play PvE games and set it to easy?
Imagine a singleplayer game had no balancing and sets you up against an endboss right after the intro - the uproar! But hardcore PvP player seem to think the world is theirs..
I find it baffling that it had to be explained to you that going and playing a pve game on easy mode is not fun for people. Comparing that to multiplayer games is idiotic. Why would we want to stomp every game? Do you not realize how boring that would be? Perhaps you're like 8 years old and your first cod was MW2019 cause there's no way in hell you played the games prior
@@raidengoodman8754 so you want to destroy noobs, but u want to feel as if it was hard ? am i right ? (i played since the first cod if u think the info is relevant)
"Imagine a singleplayer game had no balancing and sets you up against an endboss right after the intro"
I don't need to imagine it. The player fighting an unkillable boss early on is a very common game plot.
Also, the "uproar" wasn't really an uproar when Elden Ring did it with that horse boss.
@@Athasin it's because you didn't have to fight it
@@raidengoodman8754 Oh, you're one of them... personally offended by another opinion... You know, you can chose the difficulty or your opponent in most PvE games according to your skill and level of fun you want to have, right? This is kinda the point of it. And many PvE games are much harder than PvP. But you want to shoot other people to feel elevated and better than other people, not to compete against yourself. The tone of your response is proof.
I think ppl could be conditioned to both. Having no sbmm is really more rewarding as a player because you can learn how to get better,but if the noob or casual just leaves, then you end up playing against better players like you showed. A fix for that,they can have things for players to improve with. So the engagement stays.( they have some,like private matches). On the other hand, higher skill players could agree to play with sbmm,but what turns them off the most is the cheaters. A higher skilled player has gone through the ropes of learning and improving and knowing how to deal with the dynamics of a match,but when there are cheaters in the lobby that makes them not want to try because it's unfair. Because of them being turned off, they perfom worse. A fix for all of this could be just a really good anti cheat,which they could afford.
I get constantly curb stomped with SBMM. I get like 3-4 kills on average and death in the doubles digits. I very very rarely get a good game. Been like that since MW2019. So much so, I don't even play Call of Duty anymore. SBMM is broken
I also think without SBMM that its easier for people to leave faster, if you lose a game where you went 8/12 and the guys on the other team went 16/7 that probably wont get you to quite for the night because it was close, but if you go 1/17 and the other team has a guy going 43/3 then yea im done after 1 game cause dying over and over for 5 minutes ruins the game, not just the match
Only reason these kinda systems exist in cod is to milk as much money out of the players as possible. Its more shady than it is anything else tbh.
Milk money how?
@@Strait7050 I suggest looking up EOMM. There are videos that explains this a lot better than i could here :)
Make it make sense plz
@@jeremybrown9611
He can’t he’s talking out of his ass, but what I think he means is that the happier you are the more likely you’re playing more and the more you play the more money cod makes from whales who want to spend money
@@nawab256 My ass speaks the truth :) That's the point of these systems. More likely to buy skins and spend money if the matchmaking is tailored in a way that will make you come back.
The thing with cod is, it’s a casual playlist and with sbmm it’s not casual we are just playing ranked without any rewards or an actual rank to show. Sbmm is fine if it’s separate
It shouldn’t be matches were your constantly dying every respawn by the same sweaty player naw go play with the other sweatys and challenge yourself
I remember for rocket league there was an issue where a lot of top level freestylers were intentionally losing casual games just so they smurf and freestyle on lower ranked players because it became impossible to do in their own lobbies. Eventually psyonix forced them into a higher mmr or banned players who kept doing it. You also have it in call of duty where everybody knows what sbmm or engagement based matchmaking is now. They will intentionally just afk a few games just to game the system and absolutely dominate people in their lobbies. I know of a hell of a lot of people that do this because you are always going to have these people that are going to want to destroy other people in games. Difference was back in the day those games were random. You weren't guaranteed to get a lobby where the average mid tier player would stomp everybody else whereas now you can just game the system. Especially when you just have the one playlist it's easier to do. I used to also just find the games more fun back then as there was more randomness to the teams. You had a mix of low, mid and higher skilled players on each team so even if you were bad yourself you still might face someone at your level but now every game you play you are forced to play carbon copies of yourself constantly. You do super well because you are using an assault rifle? Cool we'll put you against higher skill players. You switch to a sniper for a couple games and get demolished setting you back lower than you were before. You switch back to an assault rifle and just stomp people again because you were punished for experimenting. At least something like overwatch has separate queues for tank, dps, healer etc. When everything is piled into just the one playlist it becomes hell. Balancing in games is not something that is going to be an easy fix but I don't think doubling down on sbmm is the right answer. I think we need to add more options and ways for dealing with balancing There isn't a one size fits all answer as there are so many aspects to balancing a game and truthfully it can't ever be truly balanced. You will always have people trying to game the system. People with fragile egos that can't accept losing one game. New 8 year olds that have never played a game in their life. Professional players on alt accounts or who have intentionally de ranked just so they can hit clips. People Having off days where they aren't performing to their best ability. People having good days where they are performing way above their ability. People trying to experiment with new weapons or classes. There are just so many variables and I feel there won't ever be a one size fits all approach. At least diversify the playlists and try give an option to people instead of just sticking them with one or the other.
Building your game around the 1% instead of the 99% is a bad idea.
Really? How’s it working out for them? Every year COD is the best selling game and SBMM gets worse every single year…………
@@monstermarc227 it doesn’t get worse it’s the same, you must have a skill issue, work on it 😁
@@monstermarc227 so repeatedly it’s the best selling, but Sbmm gets worse? Why because the top what 5k players are tired of playing against each other? If it’s selling like you said then obviously it’s working.
@@monstermarc227isn't that precisely his point? They aren't catering to the 1% and number go up. If they catered to the 1% number might go down
@@monstermarc227 imagine praising cod lol
You don't really understand the issue, it's not matching good players into a pool against each other, it's building two teams with similar mmr and artificially capping win loss at 50%. So it finds a team with an MMR of, arbitrarily, 1.0
AND THEN if your MMR is a 3 it has to put you on a team of MMR well below 1 to average your MMR to the other teams.
But in reality the entire game is on your shoulders if you're the one that's above the average, the further you are above the average the more you're punished.
You have to sweat your balls off every match to even have a chance to win the game because your team has considerably lower skill than anyone on the other team.
It isn't fun, add ranked day one and make it functional, have social playlists where I don't have to use meta weapons every round.
it is me being played at a higher level, the sweats still having an easier lobby, is it me being perceived as a valid challenge to sweats, or is my game being changed so that noobs can get me a few more times? the problem is, YOU WILL NEVER KNOW. you'll never know if you're kill was legit, you'll never know if you won because ttk changed or because you shot well, you'll never know if you were precise cause damage changes, you'll never know how good you really are since the sweats might be getting penalised when they face me.
it's an absurd place to be in, one that has no place in anything remotely competitive (not competitive as the ranked mode or for a prize, competitive simply means it's you vs someone else).
and the biggest joke is that teams are still unbalanced as if we haven't had balancing done right since 2009. this is pathetic
Unranked/no skill match making it's pretty bad. Seen servers died cause of it. As a business this is terrible.
COD has had SBM since black ops 1. Halo is my favorite shooter and it’s always had it . The problem isn’t SBMM , the problem is COD.
It’s how their sbmm works, plenty of games have it and it works fine their sbmm makes the game so unenjoyable
That's a common talking point for Pro SBMM, but the SBMM COD black ops 1 had is not at all comparable to what it is today.
@@Im_helplesswell their sbmm was like other shooters and games: a wide range for normal and a stricter range for ranked. But it changed at COD AW, they changed something in their sbmm to make it stricter in normal too and it was chaos and since then nothing has changed.
This problem is COD only, for exemple league of legends they do a wide range for normal play ( bronze can play against Diamond and Diamond can play against Challenger) and a stricter range (ranked). Other shooters does the same as Riot and this was kinda done before league too.
Idk what Activision did but they have only themselves to blame
@@Im_helpless
Make it makes sense because you’re not making any sense
you mustve not been very good at halo then
I just feel like this is a “And in other news, water is wet” kind of thing where it feels very obvious to me that randomly matching with players grossly out of your league will be less fun.
But it does interest me that only the highest skilled players hate this. Like, the idea of being one of the best among the best really ruins the fun factor of gaming. Is the point where you run out of things to learn it hampers the experience? Is it a restrictive meta?
the problem with SBMM, is that it doesn't help you progress, or if it does it, so slowly it's painful in itself, by placing you with people only at your skill level, you won't ever have that frustration of being crushed and wanting to improve, or checking someone precisely to see how they play, what they do differently etc, back in my days on PC shooters you learned the hard way, and you progressed faster for it.
Sweats complaining against being sweats in SBMM, what a modern day wonder of ironic comedy
Problem with SBMM is the sweats vs sweats, MidS vs Mids and Noobs vs Noobs and with that you have EVERY category struggling and not having a good time every or most games bc you're playing against people on your kevel every time. I prefer having saying like 6 or 7 good or half decent matches and being slammed 3 times vs having to struggle every game
i think it should be a thing but a seperate mode/queu where you sign up for it so there’s no complaints if you get stomped on as you can still go back to the mode that has it
Not having skill-based matchmaking is ridiculous. If you're a high-skilled player, you should play against other high skilled players. This is coming from someone who is very competitive by nature. Do you put high school baseball teams against major league baseball teams?
Wanting to play against weaker or beginner players is a poor attitude. All these "high-skilled players" should be ashamed.
Pathetic.
I believe the best method to deal with this dilemma is to learn from MGO 2 (MGS4). What made that online approachable to all players is that there are lobbies based on one’s skill level. There will be lobbies for advanced, noobs and the middle. There will also be lobbies where it is pure casual where it will not affect your skill level score; really great for practice and just goofing off. Another thing that was cool was your level is earned by exp points but rather how well you play.
I'm getting tired of content creators trying to defend SBMM, it's a bad practice and everyone would much rather have ranked than "pseudo ranked in casuals" and then false-ranks in Ranked.
05:10 This _perfectly_ illustrates how bad SBMM actually is and how much it encourages smurfing, because this scenario wouldn't even happen unless Ayden was forcibly put into that group. (A normal game would have at least a few reasonable contenders to skilled players.)
06:38 The argument made in this video is "If a skilled player dominates then the majority has a worse time" but this isn't true. There are plenty of examples of this in older games without SBMM that had didn't have burnout because of "skilled players doing good" and nobody was complaining that some guy had a 4.0 k/d. Luke misses the point, the problem isn't that "one player does good" it's that you see that one player and you want to _be that good_ .
15:50 "Low/mid tier players don't bother playing that playlist" Yeah they do. Luke what are you even talking about? "Casual" match is more than ranked in total players for every single game that has _ever_ given it as a reasonable option.(the game has to have a decent player base to split in the first place)
17:50 "I just don't understand how you counter the data" The most long running games of all time with a high playerbase didn't use skill base matchmaking. Luke I think the problem here is you're using modern COD and not any game that refutes that. it's a pure sample bias you're having.
Also: Believing Activision at their word is just incredibly naive Luke...
SBMM is usually the flag that signifies a game won't last. It creates annoying matches, nobody likes to play sweats all the time, and any positive you can attribute to SBMM you could have just thrown to a Ranked Mode and it would do it _better_ .
Sorry Luke, I like your vids but it's just a terrible understanding of the subject.
I actually feel like this is also wrong. Many older games just had servers you could join from a list of options. Essentially this would be the none skill based game modes because it literally has no matchmaking. So I'd say keep everything you have right now which is essentially none ranked and ranked, but add community servers or something similar to that like in cs and a few other games. Then all the people wanting a more casual experience can have it and it can also be fun for more skilled players so they can go and crush pugs if they want.
"it's a pure sample bias you're having." As ur entire argumentation ? i cant disagree more with all ur points, u guys are just a noisy minority of people complaining about sbmm......
@@jingsterling Agreed
@pierrickoger1148 I don't think you can disagree with my points in a coherent manner, hence your reply is vague handwaving.
A proof of the perception you mentioned is two guns in an old game called Return to Castle Wolfenstein: The MP 40 and the Thompson. Everyone thought the Thompson did more damage than the MP 40 because the gunsho had more bass compared to the MP 40, but it turns out they had the exact same damage values.
As someone who doesn't play multiplayer games, I don't understand the controversy behind skill-based matchmaking. You would think online players would *want* to play against others of similar skill levels or ranks. Or are competitive multiplayer people just built different and need that random chance to enter a match and get shit-canned so hard by a single person that they can't even leave their spawn point?
You're right, we *do* wanna play against others with similar skill levels. Just not in every match and not artificially in the unranked modes. Having to sweat every match is equally as unfun as noob stomping every match because it just gets boring and frustrating
As a fighting game player i find this entire thing funny. The day i cry over losing to a better player would be the day i hang up my gaming hat.
If you dont want to sweat in a pvp game, why not just play something thats single player?
Thats why i have my non competitive games sitting there for when i want chill.
But when i hop online to play other people im not gonna get upset if that other person was just better than me.
That other player actually motivates me to be better "im not losing to that shit again"
Maybe im missing something to be honest, who knows. This whole debate is just wild from my point of view.
@@raidengoodman8754 " Having to sweat every match is equally as unfun as noob stomping every match because it just gets boring and frustrating" LUL
@@Toomsday94You guys are clueless, in fighting games you aren’t playing with a team. You didn’t lose cause the other guys were better in CoD, you lose cause SBMm gave you bad team mates. We often slay out and still lose. You are out of your depth.
It doesn’t work that way you silly summer child.
I used to think SBMM was terrible but after years of experiencing it and then playing games without it i realize how it has made online environments better for game to game experience. Because without it the variation between games is way too high and it does lead to people leaving because those that get blown out quit which will inevitably lead to nothing but derats anyway. I can understand wanting easier matches from time to time but the long run i do see now how SBMM has been better for overall experience.
The people that complain about SBMM don't want a balanced game, they want to dominate every game because they can't handle losing.
No one should ever listen to those people.
brain dead take, i just want the fun times from bo2, sbmm (the way its implemented) forces your lobby to disband instead of staying and potentially getting better against the people you're already playing. I used to be so bad at bo2 but i got better as I kept playing against the same people adapting to their playstyle, when the game forces you to play against new people constantly you dont get better, the people that were already good stay good and the people that are bad stay bad, im decent enough to keep above just barely a 1.0 k/d in some of the newer games (cold war, vanguard and mw22) and i have not improved, i get lucky every now and then drop some big killstreaks but those times are rare and therefore most of the time the game is just un-rewarding, cod's sbmm is bad game design.
If i were to flip your argument in the same radical way just opposite it would look like this. "The people that want to keep sbmm in unranked dont want a balanced game, they just want to stay at the top of the leaderboards giving no newcomers a chance to get as good or have any fun. No one should ever listen to these people."
The truth is, in new cod's you have to play like its your job to see any noticeable change, but people just want to wind down and relax after a stressful day, if I win 3 good matches in a row the game puts me in double or more losing matches in a row and I feel like I haven't improved at all.
Finally, someone giving the voice to the normal players. Most RUclipsrs who play games for a living are inevitably in the top teir of players so have the point of view of the top teir players. As a casual player it sucks when you get in a lobby with a reverse booster who destroys everyone
I love how it's always the sweats who cry about SBMM because they don't want to play against other sweats😂😂
TBF nobody wants to play against sweats not even casuals.
nah it more about you get bad teammates, this is a team based game
This is such an NPC cope statement and it’s tired. Everyone is a sweat to a scrub, and scrubs always parrot this BS non point. Also anyone with friends know SBMm is bad regardless of skill.
With no SBMM 100% of players can improve their own game experience by getting better and it provides incentive to play. With sbmm, your experience will get worse as you improve so there's no incentive to.
The thing is, even myself, as a casual player who isnt the best at video games I still dont have a good time. Everytime I load into a match it seems to be like a lottery on if the game is going to go really well, or really poorly. I would rather have a consistent experience. I remember in the times of MW2 where you would just get a consistent experience, sure you get smashed but you work your way up and you can see valuable progress. With the way SBMM is done nowadays its just an inconsistent experience, if you get paired up with people who are bad you dominate, then the next game you get dominated yourself. Its the lack of consistency that personally made me stop playing.
Exactly bro. I would say I’m above average but it’s such a damn lottery experience with how cod has been handling the matchmaking every since MW 2019. This HAS NEVER BEEN AN ISSUE for all the cod games from cod 4 to black ops 4. Advanced warfare had SBMM at the beginning but was quickly turned down because it made no sense to have it in public matches. Modern cods public matches is just ranked 24/7 for every single player. Activision is just a greedy company like anybody else and just want easy money from the causals at the end of the day.
@@iPqko I completely agree with you man, just their way to make money. And yea I stopped buying cods after black ops 4 onwards bc it was just so bad, you cant get a consistent experience so its just more of a turn off. Havent touched cod properly in years now, i assume lots of people have done the same but the fanbase that they do have just spend a shit ton of money so it doesnt matter to them. Wouldnt be surprised if their player numbers are like 10-20% of what it was in peak cod.
@@hasal8747 I still play cod because i just can’t let go of the franchise and i really don’t suck at it. I just think Activision simply just want to have so much money the fastest way possible so they just completely changed the matchmaking when MW 2019 came out. People are gonna say to go play ranked in cod and yes I don’t mind playing ranked but it has the exact same issue just like pubs with the team balancing. It is such a lose lose situation man.
@@iPqko why u still play cod? find a new game
@@iPqko Yea for real, I think they just need to make either that they scale the SBMM WAYYY back to make it more manageable and predictable (even if its keeping lobbies, cause I loved that shit back in the day when u lowkey beefing w someone haha). Or they just remove it entirely and make ranked, you cant have both, makes it a hellhole
I think there is more to it including Microtransactions. I play mp tdm with solos (most no skins, some with skins) getting matched against a sweaty clan (full cosmetics). I have heard they will push paying players with people with no skins to promote buying skins. I have a good time with the casual team cause we play for fun, but after so many sweaty matches against clans it just gets boring. And it's constant, back to back match's, I get solos and the other team a group. Can be a coincidence. I remember when they would match group sizes so it would always be even.
This is the biggest strawman video take of SBMM ffs
Nobody is saying they want sweats with 4 KDs to be put in lobbies with sub 1 KD players, thats just absurd.
What people mean by no SBMM is allow VARIANCE to occur within matchmaking. Some good players and some bad players mixed in the lobby, not a one sided mess of gods vs ants.
The problem with SBMM is that it causes every game and every match to feel the same and its boring af.
People want a return of old matchmaking where some players in a match were easier and some were harder to kill and as a result create rivalries to try and take out the top dog.
Now I will say the issue with modern CoD isn't entirely the fault of SBMM but rather a combination of it and forced disbanding lobbies as the constant reshuffling of players creates an anti social environment where you cant even form a good rivalry or bond with players.
No the problem is he also is the bottom of the bottom skill level becouse he never realy plays shooters ever so his view from the out side is kind of biosed .
It's absolutely crazy that they don't have a bots only mode for offline that actually works on cod
Never understood the hate for SBMM. It literally makes the most sense. Even with it on, there are games where I’m just better and other games where I’m absolute dog water compared to the others. Nice change of pace is always nice. Keep the game interesting.
Smurfing is an issue. No ranked matchmaking is basically they want free smurfing. This will break the balance and alienate the players who lose all the time and eventually kill the game.
Casual modes in fighting games are unplayable because skill based matchmaking is off. The only solution to have fun is ranked mode this way you will face people in your skill level.
Also entry skill level is important Titan fall is dead franchise because the movement system is so crazy it had such high bar skill level it became parkour game and not a shooter, even the titans were became useless gamic.
The game was sold as shooter with cool titans but what we got was parkour game.
Those companies invest fortunes in consumer behavior, studying and then making moves to take the market, the issue is people don't care, they just buy and shame others, just saying "don't buy cod" or something like that and they jump with the "stfu broke Boi" card. Nothing will change 😂
That's basically what happened with CS2 matchmaking. Every second game you're playing vs cheater, and result is fully dependent on which team has more cheaters... Everyone stopped playing MM, nobody wants to be a destroyed spectator
The lack of SBMM will be xdefiants ultimate downfall. A lot of people getting turned off the moment they leave the beginner playlist and it has a terrible leavers problem. Worse than COD. I assume its because people are frantically looking for lobbies they wont get anhilated in. Reckon itll struggle to maintain a healthy playerbase as the skill gap widens
Well. That or the netcode.
Just put sbmm in a ranked mode there...