I've been trying new genres of games and as a lower skilled player the only thing that allows me to try these games in multiplayer is SBMM. I've tried games in the same genre without it, and the difference of what my true level is is palpable. I've been reading forum threads to see what the normies think about it. And one thing I've learned is that the type of gamers who post on forums, are usually not your typical average gamer, but more hardcore just to care enough to post. So often their complaints might be the opposite for a casual noob like me, and actually be to my benefit.
Its just an interesting exercise in hypocrisy and the golden rule with the SBMM bitching. They don't like being hunted by the sharks, but complain that they can't have a "casual relaxing" game of hunting guppies. Theres no self-awareness of staring into the mirror, of what a hell being around people like themselves is.
I used to have this fantasy of all the Nietzschean ubermen, will to power, will to dominate types being sent to their own Mad Max island where they can dominate each other. Wolves eating wolves. But it seems its not every fun to be on a diet of wolfmeat, they need some nonconsenting sheep too. I've seen some proposals for a more voluntary SBMM. But the self-aware among them, admit that most casuals would choose it, and so they'd still be in the same box. Basically they want casuals to be forced to play with them.
It just fascinating to see in the gaming world, how ubermen feel about being sent to my Mad Max island where wolves can only eat other wolves. https://www.vice.com/en/article/jgq5w8/why-players-blame-skill-based-matchmaking-for-losing-in-call-of-dutyhttps://www.denofgeek.com/games/call-of-duty-skill-based-matchmaking-sbmm-controversy-explained/
probably because "skill"-based matchmaking doesn't work, people will abuse it to get the "skill" tier that they wanna play in and it's impossible to dictate an individual's skill based on wins/losses of entire teams. Games like team fortress 2 work just fine without skill-matched players, almost every game has a mixed bag of good and bad players that more often than not even each other out
SBMM is retarded in a game such as Call of Duty.
It's like playing Elder Scrolls or fallout trash with level scaling.
You're stuck using "meta" shit which usually just means most overpowered and boring weapons. No creativity allowed.
The one thing I would concede to the "sweats" is that games do need a sense of progression and accomplishment. So games could at least tell players what level of lobby they are in and it could become a source of pride. And wanting to play in a lower lobby would be shameful like a MLB pro trying the little leagues. Give them the bragging rights for how tough their lobbies are.
It just reflects the reality that weapons aren't perfectly balanced, so your level of competitiveness falls with lesser weapons. But you can still play and have fun at that level. The only way to avoid that is to artificially make all weapons perfectly equal.
Exactly the problem.
Without SBMM everybody uses whatever looks cool and feels good.
With SBMM it's all m4 and shotgun combo.
And when my favorite weapon is any 9mm pistol I'm quite unable to compete with people who just go for the highest number instead of style.
You could just lose a few matches and play at the level where it is competitive
TF2 is a different beast because you can still contribute and be helpul even if you're not that great on an individual level.
Most people who use gaming forums are casuals they are a step above the weekend normie who plays a game with a beer you get the idea. The gaming forums are often full of autistic people who study the mechanics and suck at the game depending on the franchise (battlefield I am looking at you).
The ONLY people who complain about skill based matchmaking are complete shitters that try hard but cannot compete with regular players who can pub stomp. For the hardcore good gamers it does not matter and is welcomed as the gap between the elite gamer and the try hard is actually huge.
The problem with SBMM if there is one is how it does not often quantify skill and just how many points someone gets and a lot of the time you can have a comparably low oint per minute score despite sweating if you are lets say not planting yourself on the objective itself doaking up score but not really contributing like the sweat rushing.
I was a 0/001% gamer however so biased but quite simply people who complain about skill based matchmaking just need to git gud if they complain it makes the game unfun.
That sounds reasonable, but CODMW ranks only your last 3 games or some such, so you end up playing 1 game against utter potatoes and then 2 games with shotgun wielding wallhackers.
>>53321>I was a 0/001% gamer however so biased but quite simply people who complain about skill based matchmaking just need to git gud if they complain it makes the game unfun.
And the ironic thing is they tell the casuals to "git gud" and face them, when they can't face the bigger fish themselves
Instead of facing their equals and superiors, they want to be Rambo mowing down hordes of casuals, ruining the fun of 20 other people
Its good for the casuals. And its good for the elites. The ones who really feel screwed over is the "upper middle class" of the gaming world.
Although idk how much even the elites enjoy it, since even the pro-gamers are crying the most about it.
>competitive call of duty
God just fucking kill me already.
The normies bitch a lot about SBMM because they want easy things, if they were always playing against total retards they would say "what a good game I'm so fucking good" but because the game forces you to play with your equals or people a bit better and no one likes to lose that's why they cry and complain.
Even funnier when you realize that the gamers below the casual "good" gamer on COD are literally children or old boomers with no thumbs whatever.
These normalfags care too much about the ego they will be rude to bad players despite not being good themselves and blame every fault of theirs on game mechanics or the other player being "unfair" a scrub. Please note that skilled gamers can have legit issues with mechanics I am talking about these casuals a term I use liberally to describe even "good" players.
When I gamed I used to have many people wanting to play with me trying to prove themselves and all that nonsense but I actually played with people who I enjoyed the company of and that included some old man etc I cannot stand these arrogant gamers that think just because they are a cut above the weekend only noob they are good.
Their ego actually stops them ever getting better.>>53339>>competitive call of duty
When you hav a good understanding of FPS mechanics you laugh at this because the skill gap and skill ceiling with gunplay in COD has been made as small as possible. You WILL miss because random recoil that does not follow average expectations within certain ranges AKA truly random.
I played against a professional COD team it is ALL tactics to the point it may as well be a strategy game and this is because the gunplay is so shit that anyone good is a master.
>>53341> it is ALL tactics to the point it may as well be a strategy game
isn't that good in a way, of being a military sim?
They also claim that in the "good ol days" of COD, sometimes they'd do the pub stomping and other times they'd be stomped, and it was fun. But if such a system was really implemented in a fair equal way, then they would stomp and be stomped equally and so their KD and win ratios would still fall towards 1.0. They wouldn't really want it, and it be even more arbitrary to true skill than facing equals
World of Tanks and Battlefield are the opposite of it, 0 SBMM, complete anarchy. And their bases are always complaining how uneven their matches are, decided before it starts.
No because it is not very in depth it is really just about>move to here manipulate spawns>hold this head glitch>throw nades here
It is more psychological if that makes sense but you need to follow the meta it is just not fun when you understand how shit the gunplay is.>>53345
A single godly stomper can control the game and it is glorious
In Battlefield? 1 guy can make a difference in 64 man match?
Yes easily because despite the game being casual in how it is usually played compared to CS there is a huge skill gap consider how the TTK (time to kill) is longer than cod and there is immense reward for headshots or not missing.
Consider how there is gun mechanics to be mastered and also movement mechanics to be exploited.
A good player can jump around a corner and easily wipe out an entire squad a good player pub stomping in that game simply kills everyone allowing the blueberries as allies are known as to move up and do the capturing of points.
It is a huge shame that DICE are incompetent at developing games and doing competitive because the game actually has a lot of skill involved. BF4 compared to COD in the same game modes is night and day there is nothing comparable between them hardly.
Not to mention those guys who love flight sims and have a stick who proceed to gun down the entire enemy team from 5000 feet in the air.
if you game needs to isolate players according to their skill, that game is weird
i like massive games where everyone is in the same world. the noobs who arent good at pvp instead do noncombat things or can pve, or perform support roles in pvp. that seems way more interesting than a bunch of serves filled with a dozen people of approximately the same skill level. you will never run into a gaming god that just 5v1 someone and is coing your way and so you piss your pants and flee for your life not wanting to lose your stuff. games like old planetside and the current planetside 2 did this well i think. mmorpgs to some extent do this nice also. round-based shooters like call of duty idk how you would implement this, everyone would rage i think
All you need to do in battlefield to have your entire team win is to stand on a flag for 2 minutes.
the other 31 on your team are too retarded to do that.
Battlefield literally has cone recoil.
Are you retarded.
Has spreadc that can be negated with optimal range and resetting spread. Has recoil that can be eliminated, has visual recoil that means nothing.
You do not know shit kid
multiplayer games are a bane
>>53341>When you hav a good understanding of FPS mechanics you laugh at this because the skill gap and skill ceiling with gunplay in COD has been made as small as possible. You WILL miss because random recoil that does not follow average expectations within certain ranges AKA truly random.
I played against a professional COD team it is ALL tactics to the point it may as well be a strategy game and this is because the gunplay is so shit that anyone good is a master.
unironically the reason I like CoD. I play CSGO when I want truly skilled FPS.
Battlefield is shit overall and panders too much to demographics that don't even play the game.
this is true, especially in games where your picks
(gear/character/etc) matter at a competitive level or with a single clear win step-by-step strategy that towers above the rest.
you can either win or have fun, rarely both.
Fucking around with miniscule retard mechanics for an advantage is not good gameplay.
everyone who complains about SBMM is a shitter and should be ignored. COD is a garbage game anyway the FPS is so bad that comp is less about actual skills that come from shooting and all about strat which would be ok if the skill ceiling wasnt intentionally extremely low.
The actual top players in shooters want to play only other top players and find stomping turds not only boring but detrimental to their skill level.
nice id, is every single game plagued with the quake gramps hostile mentality in this thread? I see why some prefer the solo mmos instead
people in online games seem especially awful the last 10 years, if you play for fun then you will get scolded by teenagers
Every FPS without SBMM is practically unplayable for the average and below average player, you just die instantly, never get a kill. It would be more fun to just play against bots. Strict SBMM is relatively new, since MW 2019, and it has made the FPS playable for the masses.
COD, mario Kart, Halo.. Any more games that actually punish players who are good?
The mario kart comparison is a good one. The playing field isn't even but I think it is more acceptable because it doesn't affect your actual gameplay, just the odds of you picking up better items. This allows skilled players to still keep their skill advantage while giving the less skilled players a chance.
Of course rubberbanding literally makes the AI faster, but most players don't care about fairness when it comes to AI opponents.
I found this long vid on how the entire core of COD is designed around letting bad players feel good. And mind you this is from 2019, before SBMM really kicked into high gear. Some gamers actually look back to BO4 now with nostalgia as the last COD without strict SBMM.
As for me, I'm glad about it. Gaming is supposed to be an escapist power fantasy to feel good. They do it in single player games. And its amazing they've managed to do it even in a MP game, where you're up against real humans. https://www.pcgamer.com/call-of-duty-red-orchestra-2-interview/
if someone in your "team" is abusing op abilities its only fair that you help the other team right? you know a game has at least a couple of devs that still care if it lets you restore balance but if you get reported for "griefing" thats how you know it caters to competitive crabs
Has anyone noticed that people these days seem to be obsessed with competitive gameplay? Usually it just means making fun gameplay bad and tryhard gameplay even better, what happened to having fun?
Video game developers figured out how to prey on insecurity. Fun doesn’t matter if you’re the lowest rank, cause all the groids will lambast you. So now everyone is obsessed with “the climb”. They promoted their shitty e-sports to say “look, this could be you, you could make money from video games”. And so many gamers, being failed normalfags tired of gaming being “that hobby for nerds and losers”, desperately latched on to any validation they could find. So now they all need to play ranked, they need to show they didn’t “waste” all those hours having fun, they were just training for their days as an e-sport star. And the smallest validation from having a gold star next to their name instead of a silver or bronze one shows them “look, you’re that much closer to being a pro”. Now they can look down on all those lesser players having fun, cause they just aren’t skilled like they are. And if you don’t do good? It’s not your fault. You’re just stuck in elo-hell, it’s just your teammates dragging you down. You’re the star of the show here.
I came to say e-sports became big and people started thinking they could turn videogames into a career but this wiz >>56176
said it way better than I ever could
Everything wrong with the world today stems from the jews trying to play on people's narcissism
>>56176>Fun doesn’t matter if you’re the lowest rank, cause all the groids will lambast you.
Well the genius of SBMM, and COD specifically, is how it can make you feel like you are a esport sweat, even if you are in the lowest rank.
i don't like skill-based matchmaking because i have dogshit aim. i have to take others by surprise or have some other advantage in my favor for me to win most fights. so i work my ass off setting up kills and gaining higher skill levels, and then i get placed into matches with fucking counterstrike kiddos that always instant headshot me with ironsight weapons from retarded distances away
it's basically a grind where i plan ahead every aspect of the enemy's death for every encounter with tons of setup and prep, and then i just get placed into matches with fucking nerds on steroids that have the reaction time of a fresh babe and i cannot win against them and then eventually it lowers my ranking and then i can actually kill other people again
this is why in most games i gravitate towards AOE, instant kill, or long range weapons where killing isn't about "i shoot you more accurately than you shoot me" and more about "i shot you first". i really liked planetside 1 and 2 since there is just one big server or map and there is no splitting up of people, there is enough confusion from others that you can be sneaky and flank people and do all kinds of fun things. games where you simply run around and shoot are gay and i will never be good at those
I don't give a fuck about "competitive gaming" and SBMM, I just want to have fucking fun goddamit, I don't care if I lose a lot really, it has 0 impact in my life.
This competitive thinking is really killing games, the vast majority of retards who complain about this shit will never be pros anyway.
Have you stopped to consider that many people find competition fun?
It would seem that transparency and rankings would make SBMM more accepted.
But it could also piss of players on both sides of the spectrum. The 80% of casuals would now know how low they rank, which defeats the whole point of SBMM artificially shielding them from that. And the sweats would know just how sweaty their lobbies constantly are, which would probably piss them off more. I mean they've already guessed how the system works and hate it. Having in their face proof probably wouldn't help. Except for the prestige and honor thing. Like its an accomplishment to play at the highest level. But I guess even if it is going to serve the 20% of skilled, if it harms the 80% of casuals it goes against the whole market logic they have. They don't benefit at all, and just have the veil pulled away on how they suck.
well that seems more about map size than anything else. COD Vanguard for instance introduce different "pacings" of player size, and there is a push towards higher numbers on bigger maps.
I still play in the classic 6v6 "tactical" pacing. And on big maps it can feel somewhat empty, like hunting. So the fast TTK and big maps, make it more about tactical positioning. Basically the 1st person to see the enemy 1st, and fire 1st, almost always wins. So its all about maneuvering and map positioning and predicting, to be in that spot to see the enemy 1st.
So if anything I'd say a big map with few players gives the most opportunity for sneaking around.
probably not related to the thread but you can have game modes that are "fun" napoleonic wars gave me some of the best genuine laughs I've had compared to the vanilla game but vanilla still has its silly stupid clown moments and it was awesome.
some players take leadership and decide to form a shield wall and like the mad general he is, charges first (then dies) lol thus lowering the morale of the shield wall leading to some deserters, unintended comedy as its finest dude.
An actual esports professional bitching that he can't mow down noobs cuz of SBMM. Might as well just play easy mode bots at that point. https://charlieintel.com/courage-explains-what-killed-his-love-for-cod-multiplayer/156090/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CouRageJD
This is like an MLB guy complaining he's banned from the Little Leagues
there doesn't need to be matchmaking, if you have a actual game of 20 or so people then team shuffler will usually sort out and problems while not putting you in stupid competitive matches
Well for the average player those non-SBMM matches are the "stupid competitive matches"
Even if the teams are balanced, the players aren't, and the lesser ones are just going to get dunked on.
Besides when these pros talk about popping off on a "relaxing match" they aren't expecting any challenge from the other side.
mod that became a warband dlc, same devs though. doesn't take itself seriously, wish I knew of similar communities.
noticed that coop games lean towards the competitive mentality a bit too much like deep rock galactic (shame because the ambient of the spaceship feels safe from that which I am trying to get away from and the preparation phase makes you feel like the 4 hobbits until I have to play catch up -_-
Holdfast has a huge meme community. tbh it kinda turned me off for a while, since im more into napoleonic history not into meme comedy. but i eventually got it and just muted everyone, got a few kills my 1st match. havent had a chance to get into it.
but if you like a jokey meme community set in that era you might like it
I hate registrations, logins, rewards, ranks whatever to justify total DRM control. Back then it was just a game. If you wanted to be a professional, you joined a league or whatever.
Rest was free, fun, running around like a prick and don't give any fuggs. There were also servers who bannend noobs and pricks, so everything was fine. Everyone could play the style he wanted on the map he wanted, the mod he wanted …
Now you depend solely on the company. With all this ranking and stuff, it's even more bitching around than in the good old days - because now even your freetime activities are being measured, optimized, monitored - even policed. Games are actually work now. Even in "casual" modes. That's why I keep playing CS 1.6 and Quake Live.
Everyone wants to be an esports player/streamer now. They're all soon to be pros rather than casuals. That's where dumb terms like "sweaty" comes from.
Skill based match making isn't what you think it is. It's not rating A players A-/A/A+/B+ players. It's A ranked guy plays C+ ranked players because he bought a few skins and wants to feel good for his purchase/show other players they can buy stuff and be as good as him. There are hundreds of ways games lie and cheat to you to get you into the system and keep you there. Newbie players get bonus damage so they get kills in early games and get invested in the game (Gears of war did this). If you lose a few games you get put in a bot match with false player names to get you a free win (Pokemon Unite, possibly Halo Infinite does too).>>56184
A very small number of over invested people find it fun. They're loud and obnoxious online so they seem much bigger than they are. Games leaning into competitive play ultimately fail because they alienate the casuals in the fanbase.>>56205>Cons
Casual players aren't exposed to higher level play so play totally different games making balancing impossible
Players aren't forced to improved and learn the game because they're always against similarly terrible players
Players in a party of different skill levels are forced way above or way below their skill level making it impossible to balance different skilled parties
Players who want a relaxing game where they don't risk deranking if they don't play their best can't join a mixed skill lobby where their performance isn't monitored.
Losing skill points because you wanted to do a melee only round puts a higher skilled player in lower skilled lobbies defeating the whole system.
The solution to all of this is private servers. Skill levels will find servers suitable for them and play happily. But that's not how the bot net works so now it's all monitored and tracked to make sure you're promoted the cash shop and you're kept chasing the bait of wasting your life grinding a battle pass for red sun glasses at 200 hours of grinding.
I wouldn’t say private servers are the solution, they were just what existed before matchmaking decided to create problems. But you are correct, though private servers won the make a comeback because those don’t make money for the corporation.
People who complains about SBMM are buttmad because they don't want to face competition, they want easy wins against weak opponents, how is making you play against opponents at your level a bad thing? and these retards even kinda admit it by saying that sometimes they just want to chill and not feel like they're playing in a competition, the only thing these retards want are easy matches and SBMM prevents them from doing that, and so they see that they suck at the game.
If you want to "chill" play a single player game, you don't see olympic athletes competing against kids for easy wins when they want to "chill".
This is the reason it sucks, it just doesn't appeal to a wide audience. >>56394
Skill in video games is hardly ever an issue. Anyone can just follow the meta and do well nowadays.
Damn, I genuinely miss going on random fps servers with weird plugins and maps. Are there any games around that even do that kind of thing well any more?
TF2 still has private servers, and if you can probably find a server with mariokart on it. Versus saxton hale is still pretty popular. I haven't played since in a long while and I hear there's a big bot problem though.
CSGO comes to mind.
Holdfast community is a really interesting thing and quite balance imho.
In one public game you can have extremely professional players fighting tooth and nail for controlling one ground, and next to it you can have a fist fight with musicians from both sides dancing together and neither would get a 2nd look. Pro players don't shit on people who just have fun and those who have fun are perfectly fine with pro's too.
It is really a nice break up from the time when I shouted at for failing to uber some heavy in a specific moment in tf2.
nw and pr communities will always have a special place in my memory. for the first time I was accepted in a squad of like minded coward outcasts like izzy and benny (from the mummy films) being rejected from the other squads for being third worlders is what we had in common lol
PR? You mean project reality?
Man that game was fun. Especially insurgency mode where both sides were a bit more goofy. I loved packing a 5-8 men into one big car and basically going on a suicide mission. Nevermind the all cars that blow up and people shouting allahakbar on mumble.
Simple times. Now the servers are empty and Squad is more popular but I feel that game still needs a bit more work.
You get a similiar vibe in TF2 but it's more segregated by servers. There's competitive servers where everyone better get their shit together and then there's 24/7 2Fort where you can fight if you feel like it but it's mostly for goofing around and hanging out.