https://youtu.be/6i5642d4DNoThe above link details a long standing CoD dev’s thoughts on “SBMM” in non-ranked modes. Please watch.His highlighted point is that “VARIANCE” is the most favorable and ethical experience for non-ranked online game modes. This is something I have literally been screaming about for years.I am exactly 361 games in on Season 15 and I have 2 wins. Please read that again. TWO wins. Not because I am below average, but because above average players who aren’t Preds are literally punished by matchmaking. Each online service game is different. There is a difference between BR’s and Arena shooters. But the fact remains that curating lobbies without reward (non-ranked) creates a problematic experience for anyone who is on the “right side of the skill bell curve” (save the tippy top players).

@Axs5626Sxa5001I got as far through that as I could before it made me want to put my fist through my screen.The idea that non-ranked gameplay should be a feeding ground for high-level players, and that it's completely okay because there are no ranks at stake, is the single most offensive thing I've ever heard on the subject of sbmm. It's exactly the thing that high-level players say when they're tired of slogging it out with other high-level players and start feeling put upon, as if they have some intrinsic right to crap all over lower-level players for no other reason than because it would be more fun for them.And I'm also tired to death of the very mistaken idea that ranked gameplay is reward driven and unranked gameplay is "casual," "non-competitive," "insert your own rationalization here for why it's okay to pit what amounts to professional athletes against kids." Rankings are a head game that do not REWARD players, they DESCRIBE their abilities. Players very mistakenly think of it as reward-based, and hence my description of it as a head game. The only reward in any game, imo, is a win. And last I checked this game offers wins in both ranked and unranked gameplay. Taking a win away from a guy who just started the game and has twenty matches in two weeks, so that some sweaty diamond grinder can feel better about himself is pitiable.Virtually every competitive sport I can think of has gameplay broken into peer groups, grouped either by age or by skill. Little Leaguers very seldom, unless I've missed some new development, play against the Red Sox. And with reason. That kind of pummeling doesn't make the kids into better players, and it absolutely shouldn't make the pros feel all tough and manly. If it does then those people should be medicated. And barred from the sport.Sorry about the rant but I've been pissed off about this since Halo 2, and it depresses me to have to keep defending something that seems so obvious. If you can explain it to me in a different way than Mr. Former Infinity Ward I promise to read every word.

@reconzero wrote:@Axs5626Sxa5001I got as far through that as I could before it made me want to put my fist through my screen.The idea that non-ranked gameplay should be a feeding ground for high-level players, and that it's completely okay because there are no ranks at stake, is the single most offensive thing I've ever heard on the subject of sbmm. It's exactly the thing that high-level players say when they're tired of slogging it out with other high-level players and start feeling put upon, as if they have some intrinsic right to crap all over lower-level players for no other reason than because it would be more fun for them.And I'm also tired to death of the very mistaken idea that ranked gameplay is reward driven and unranked gameplay is "casual," "non-competitive," "insert your own rationalization here for why it's okay to pit what amounts to professional athletes against kids." Rankings are a head game that do not REWARD players, they DESCRIBE their abilities. Players very mistakenly think of it as reward-based, and hence my description of it as a head game. The only reward in any game, imo, is a win. And last I checked this game offers wins in both ranked and unranked gameplay. Taking a win away from a guy who just started the game and has twenty matches in two weeks, so that some sweaty diamond grinder can feel better about himself is pitiable.Virtually every competitive sport I can think of has gameplay broken into peer groups, grouped either by age or by skill. Little Leaguers very seldom, unless I've missed some new development, play against the Red Sox. And with reason. That kind of pummeling doesn't make the kids into better players, and it absolutely shouldn't make the pros feel all tough and manly. If it does then those people should be medicated. And barred from the sport.Sorry about the rant but I've been pissed off about this since Halo 2, and it depresses me to have to keep defending something that seems so obvious. If you can explain it to me in a different way than Mr. Former Infinity Ward I promise to read every word.AMEN!!!This is what I keep talking about. Their EOMM doesn't work, except on the poor kids who think they will be the next twitch star and keep taking the abuse. It doesn't convince me to play more, it convinces me to do my "2 a day as ________" for 2 total stars and log out. It convinces me that dropping the match before we hit the ground because hot drop harry insists on taking me to Fragment is perfectly OK. It convinces me that this team game isn't a team game. And I don't care about getting all the stars because I don't care about fully completing the battle pass because I will never buy it when I am the freaking product. A product that exists to feed kills and egos to those people that want to be 'content creators' instead of getting a real job.Sorry, might be showing my age here but in my days 'content creators' made freaking ART be it paintings, literature, music, dance, something tangible and real that gave something back to humanity.This (and all video games to me) is not my dang job. I have a job. It pays me very well to think of solutions to real problems and then solve them. I put in my 40 hours plus on that. I'm not going to learn this game as a 2nd job. I'm a super casual player. I play my single player games the first time on easy. If they want me to put more time into this game, then they need to make the "I don't care I'm casual" league.And if they EVER want me to spend real cash on it, they better give me some single player content. For crying out loud, just give me the Apex version of Frontier Defense. Give all us crap casuals that that are here just because we miss Titanfall game-play and we'll go there, never to darken your BR again.

@Axs5626Sxa5001 from my point of view, the problem with Apex SBMM is the matchmaking with teammates.when I get matched in a lobby where the champ team is a stack of 3 preds or a pred and 2 masters, or a team with total kills combined are more than 250 K kills ( yes, these numbers exist ) but my teammates are lvl 200 s and so.then we have a big problem because the closer we get to facing this champ squad the more our chance of winning decreases until it gets to 0% once we get to two squads remaining.I am not going to talk about the last and current season-ranked MM because everyone knows that it's broken ( except for Respawn ) because they want to pamper their crying babies.honestly, I don't want easy matches but I don't was super sweaty ones as well and I don't want to waste 20 minutes in a match where I know that the result is already written.everyone wants a challenge...... a fair challenge where the chances are 50/50.so the teams as a whole should be all equal or ...or we need solos.but the babysitting should stop, I don't need to babysit two players who obviously don't belong in the lobby, and no one needs to babysit me when I don't belong in their lobbies.note: no disrespect to anyone, we all have different skills and I am not saying that I am great or something, not even close to decent.but you know what I mean

Games like this one are merely a lure to attract customers to spend money on microtransactions.The player is treated as a means to an end and not an end in itself.That's why they are so desperate to manage player satisfaction through "engagement-based matchmaking" because they fear losers will be leavers and then they won't have the maximum number of punters for their microtransactions and loot boxes. They want to squeeze every last cent out of the players.We may be fools for playing but then these companies have a monopoly on production and do what they like.The continued existence of this business model is really all down to government doing nothing about it.

Matchmaking thoughts from a Dev | EA Forums

44 Replies

LaughingSharko
3 years ago
Notice how many times you use the words "I want" in this post. Again, you want the game to cater to you and the other 5% of the player base. If you want to pay for everyone else's battle passes, then I'm sure the devs will be happy to make everyone else miserable so you can wipe lower-level lobbies by yourself.
Axs5626Sxa5001
3 years ago
@reconzero

I appreciate that response. I also appreciate that we can agree on certain things and not agree on other things. Exploring these matters while remaining respectful (and as compassionate as possible) is what the forum is all about.

I’m glad that you’re aware enough to acknowledge that the current structure produces a healthier win rate for you (based on your individual skill).

I guess on paper knowing that I fall in the top 5% should be reward enough, but I really can’t stress how disenchanting it is to know that at any given time (and months, going on years) people who occupy lower standings are winning FAR more than me. As you mentioned, this is the Sally Brown effect going to town on my psyche.

As for other accounts, I have about 14 different accounts, but these are dedicated to conducting tests on matchmaking. I have accounts with 400+ deaths with 0 kills/damage, and I have accounts with 8+ KDs. But again these accounts are not for playing to have fun. I am against smurfing to have fun. A high level player should NOT be playing against 57 other specifically weak/new players.

I’d like to use the last point to anchor back into another topic— matchmaking. I don’t want an “overhaul”. Or rather, I don’t want the algorithm to go away and leave everything to chance. While I do think this would indeed be “fair”, I understand the relationship between [how the bulk of average players feel] and [the life/longevity of a live service game]. I guess I am just asking for a tweak that specifically makes my own public games feel less like high-diamond/masters ranked games (with no reward).
Axs5626Sxa5001
3 years ago
@LaughingSharko

I’d advise you to go back and read the exchanges between myself and reconzero. I don’t want the matchmaking algorithm to cater to me. Because ultimately, no algorithm at all would benefit me (but even I don’t want that).

I’m sorry you’re struggling to understand my position. I think the difference between us is that I’ve been in your shoes (to a degree), but you haven’t been in mine (to a degree).
LaughingSharko
3 years ago
@Axs5626Sxa5001 I understand your position very well. Trying to state something politically doesn't change the end result of what you're proposing.

Here's another thread that covers several of the logical fallacies you've made in this thread. I'd advise you to give it a read:

https://answers.ea.com/t5/General-Discussion/Ok-so-here-is-the-real-question/m-p/12060380#M225713

We both know you've been making these threads for years, rehashing the exact same points over and over. And you will again next month.
Axs5626Sxa5001
3 years ago
@LaughingSharko

Yeah you’re right. I should just stop discussing these matters entirely because I shouldn’t “rehash” things. I appreciate that input and I should likely step away entirely from these forums.

Thanks for being open minded. Bye all, I’ve enjoyed some of our discussions.
LaughingSharko
3 years ago
@Axs5626Sxa5001 Lol. Passive aggressive much?
reconzero
Seasoned Ace
3 years ago
@Axs5626Sxa5001

"A high level player should NOT be playing against 57 other specifically weak/new players."

I agree completely. In principle. In reality I've not played a shooter (in 20 years of Halo and several more of PUBG and Apex) that didn't practically BEG the player to do this. These games, as you have observed, find some fairly insidious, if unintentional, ways to screw over most players, some more than others. How else are you supposed to register your displeasure and remedy the ill if not by passing on some of the bad karma to others? And be guaranteed that the game will sooner or later push you right back to the same place you are now. Probably sooner. Unless you make some pretty dramatic changes to your playstyle. Which defeats the purpose of even playing, imo.

I don't have a second myself, or haven't had since Halo 3, so I feel like that makes me a little less of a "devil on your shoulder" here. I don't do it, but I see the rationale for it.
Unitee01
3 years ago
@Axs5626Sxa5001*STARTS SLOW CLAP* well done sir, well done. It's like no one that is in favor of SBMM realizes that if they themselves keep playing and improving they will end up in that same tough spot and stay there, forever most likely. aka game over.
Unitee01
3 years ago
@reconzero "as if they have some intrinsic right to crap all over lower-level players" isn't that exactly what low level players are doing in reverse? Expecting good outcomes yet has never set foot in the firing range? You do realize there is an unavoidable roof they will hit eventually and end up in the same situation REGARDLESS if they are good or not?
Unitee01
3 years ago
@Axs5626Sxa5001 So right you are 🙂 Love this.

Forum Discussion

Matchmaking thoughts from a Dev

44 Replies

About Apex Legends General Discussion

Community Highlights

Anti-cheat and Matchmaking Dev Recap

New Players Guide To Understanding Apex

Event Gifting | Find a Friend Here!

Recent Discussions

Steam nonsense

Ratting in Ranked Season 26

LFM / D4-3 / EU / 18+ / Team play

QOL Improvements

Unjustified Ban and Lack of Transparency