Here's the trouble
Most competitive devs don't have the agency to give a proper ranked ladder anymore.
In most video games, matchmaking is considered part of player retention, and as such, part of revenue. So decisions about that have to be run past suits who care more about money than the competitive integrity of the game.
You see this happening everywhere right now. The only games that have genuine ranked ladders to climb anymore are fighting games, which are inherently anti-casual. By skewing the matchmaking to make it better for those casual players you aren't keeping any players you wouldn't have otherwise had.
But you can keep players that way in shooter games. The forced 50/50 winloss works for keeping casuals in games like destiny. Of course, at the expense of players like us who actually care. But we're gonna keep playing anyways in most cases. And even if we don't, we've already spent our money on the game. Player retention means less for us than it does for someone who just fresh installed.
English
-
I understand the player retention argument, and I think that makes sense in a non ranked playlist, you should win about half your games if its just for fun. But you shouldnt get matched into bad matchups in ranked, you should always have teammates of similar ability.
-
I agree But that is simply not the way the suits see it
-
Editado por Obsequious: 4/24/2025 5:40:29 PMI thought there was a game that advertised against sbmm, and now they closing shop. The game failure further emboldened these devs to incorporate Activision style matchmaking
-
SBMM is not on trial here. The 50/50 thing Activision started is against the very point of SBMM.
-
I don't think sbmm is terrible, I think eomm is egregious and should be illegal