Forum Discussion

NullEffective9's avatar
NullEffective9
4 years ago

For casual queue: a) Good MM b) Low queue times c) Trios vs. Trios -- Choose one

I keep seeing this discussion pop up in General and Feedback forums, and it's high time that everyone is reminded that your casual queue experience has to be weighted against the three items mentione...
discussion
reconzero's avatar
reconzero
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
@Axs5626Sxa5001

In my experience with decades of Halo "casual" typically meant that a top 10% player got an easy win while the bottom 90% got pubstomped but were supposed to enjoy it because "casual." So yes, it always meant loose sbmm. Extremely weak rationale in my opinion, as if the plight of the gifted is supposed to be everyone else's problem.
Axs5626Sxa5001's avatar
Axs5626Sxa5001
4 years ago
@reconzero You’re right, Halo absolutely had a loose version of SBMM and above average players won more than average and below average players. I think that’s actually a great thing.

I know a lot of people hate the idea of skill determining outcome (win rates) but in my mind that’s actually the most fair experience.
  • reconzero's avatar
    reconzero
    Seasoned Ace
    4 years ago
    @Axs5626Sxa5001 "Skill determining outcome" sounds great on the face of it, and it's less problematic in this game where the word "skill" means more and different things that it ever meant in Halo. But we still have to acknowledge that if we embraced that idea unreservedly then we would drop sbmm altogether. And we know from experience that when you do that you end up with a dead game. This is why I've been saying for years that a shallower learning curve and a lower skill ceiling would serve the majority of players and the longevity of the game far better than the alternative of sbmm. But, for whatever reason, modern game design is tails wagging dogs, and for as long as devs wish to service the 1% then they will also have to use sbmm to keep the rest of us around.

    But as a thought experiment I would love to see them introduce a limited-time sbmm-free game type. Just to see if the old wisdom holds true, and that it would drive out every normal player until only the best and the cheaters were left.
    • Axs5626Sxa5001's avatar
      Axs5626Sxa5001
      4 years ago

      @reconzeroI’m not convinced that looser SBMM = “ending up with a dead game”.

      All games die. I’m willing to accept that. But games— or rather, “franchises” that predated Apex that implemented looser SBMM did totally fine. Although, I do admit that the F2P model is different than the models of the past.

      Even Apex during the first 3 seasons (before they substantially ramped up matchmaking) was grossing millions (and ultimately billions).

      Does SBMM extend the life of a game? Probably. “Casual/New/Below average” is the largest player base. Any system that increases the likelihood of this group winning/enjoying themselves will ultimately make EA more money.

      Additionally, I do think it’s fair to state that there has been a cultural shift in the gaming community (and Western Society) as a whole, in which many feel that certain outcomes are entitled. I have to LMAO because this a totally “boomer” perspective, but a lot of people feel they should win just as much as those who are more skilled than they are, and that skill/competence shouldn’t influence outcomes. 

      All that being said I would STILL prefer the more fair system— that being:

      -Loose SBMM/EOMM in unranked so that natural hierarchies (differences in outcomes) are produced
      -A ranked system that bends over backwards to pit players of similar skill together.

      • reconzero's avatar
        reconzero
        Seasoned Ace
        4 years ago
        @Axs5626Sxa5001

        "there has been a cultural shift in the gaming community (and Western Society) as a whole, in which many feel that certain outcomes are entitled. I have to LMAO because this a totally “boomer” perspective"

        As an X with no great love for boomers, I would have called that perspective a Millenial affair, but the point is taken nonetheless. I'm not sure how real that phenomenon is, or how much it's just a construct pushed by other generations, snarky media, fill-in-the-blank. But either way, I can't quite bring myself to say that "fairness" would be a legitimate mechanism for pitting little league kids against MLB professionals... as an example. If you're talking about a player pool that is, say, classroom-wide, or maybe even school-wide - then sure, give the best players a chance to shine. But the nature of an online game is such that there would, without sbmm, be absolutely nothing separating the aforementioned little league kids from the Boston Red Sox. Is that a game you would want to watch, much less participate in, from either side? I guess you already know how I would answer that question.

About Apex Legends General Discussion

Discuss the latest news and game information around Apex Legends in the community forums.31,236 PostsLatest Activity: 3 hours ago