Submitted by McTheoran t3_11di8y6 in gaming

I genuinely do not understand why developers think this is even relatively okay or a better practice than random lobbies. I would rather have random lobbies and a specific mode (I.E, ranked) to play against my skill level. Its interesting to get smashed every couple of games and have some good ones and have some bad ones. Its not fun to work like crazy for even a close game every single game.

This practice is making it harder to make gaming an actually relaxing hobby and not some unhealthy "sport."


Why should SBMM stay where it is and not be removed from general gameplay?


edit: My mistake. I remember the absolutely bonkers amount of smurf accounts that would just destroy me. That would be even worse today. Thanks everyone!



You must log in or register to comment.

Which-Palpitation t1_ja8rad5 wrote

>”It’s interesting to get smashed every couple of games”

Casual gamers don’t feel that way at all, it’s only people that take gaming waaaaay too seriously that complain about SBMM


Mrkancode t1_ja8x4so wrote

Every time I hear people complain about SBMM now I think about that leaked DM of the YouTuber who wanted to trick terminally ill kids into playing cod with him so he could get the best clips for his YouTube channel due to them being unable to play the game properly.


SgtWaffleSound t1_ja8ri9m wrote

I was playing on my girlfriend's overwatch account one time. She doesn't play shooters very much and I've been playing them since I was like 10 years old. The difference in skill in the lobbies I was getting was overwhelming. These were people who had trouble with basic mouse movement and controls. I was destroying the entire team by myself, they literally couldn't do anything to stop me. If every game was like that, I'd imagine a lot of people would just stop playing.


det3ct t1_ja8wd5k wrote

and this is where you don’t realize that you’re in that bracket, so you’re only going to play against other bad players.

i think they’re should be only one protected bracket, and that’s for the players you played against, but after that it’s free game.

i’ll use the base statistics to say that in a game like Call of Duty, i think everybody who has a .80 KD and below should be bracketed off and protected, but after that it is completely and entirely random, and connection based. the odds are, with the amount of average players in the game, those .90kd players aren’t even going to see way better players than them anyway because there’s way less better players queuing at the same time as them.


Judge216 t1_ja8w19y wrote

But if there is no rating then it's essentially random or matched by connection quality or something so by definition it couldn't happen every game.


Mrkancode t1_ja8wm7b wrote

There is a way higher percentage of lower skilled players than high skill players. With no SBMM then medium to high skill players can take advantage of the randomness to steamroll players who don't have a chance. If this is "fun" for you, go play single player.


xaria187 t1_ja91gxr wrote

You just contradicted yourself tho. If most players are low skilled than having no sbmm doesn’t matter cause majority of the time they will play against other low skill players.


LetsGoChamp19 t1_ja97yb3 wrote

But all it takes is 1 higher skilled player to ruin the fun for the entire lobby. His team won’t get many kills because he’s taking them all and the other team won’t stand a chance


Mrkancode t1_ja998o6 wrote

No. You just don't understand how much 1 good player can carry a multiplayer game.


xaria187 t1_ja9im3b wrote

The likelihood is low. Connection based matchmaking has always been more fun.


Mrkancode t1_ja9jyl9 wrote

>The likelihood is low.

No it isn't. You're wrong.

>Connection based matchmaking has always been more fun.

No it isn't. You're wrong.

Git gud.


Judge216 t1_ja9xg1y wrote

I think he's right on both accounts. Ranked has a place but so does social, meaning random matchmaking. The arguement that a low skill player is gonna quit the game because they get stomped by someone much better in a random lobbey is silly because if they want to be matched against someone their skill level they can play RANKED. I just miss the halo 3 days of ranked social split where social was the wild west. You could get a game with guests on your team or the enemy team, a team of complete beginners or a team of sweats, it was fun as hell. A person who is gonna quit the game after getting stomped is not the player to cater to, trying to protect them is silly, they are not gonna sustain the game. The reality is microstransactions have curbed game design in an attempt to maximize player base.


Mrkancode t1_jaa0ziz wrote

>The arguement that a low skill player is gonna quit the game because they get stomped by someone much better in a random lobbey is silly because if they want to be matched against someone their skill level they can play RANKED.

This is redundant. Casual players play casual modes to avoid competitive play. You are suggesting more casual players should play more competitive modes to avoid casual games.

>hell. A person who is gonna quit the game after getting stomped is not the player to cater to, trying to protect them is silly, they are not gonna sustain the game.

This is a straw man. This isn't about retaining new players. It's about providing a consistent experience for everyone who plays it across the board in as many situations as possible.

>just miss the halo 3 days of ranked social split where social was the wild west.

Yeah this was super cool except the lobbies would have to reset and we would spend 45 seconds loading because a salty player left the game and the whole time the host could just walk around and rack up kills on everyone while the rest of the lobby was black screened. That's why myself and probably you too rarely touched social because it was toxic as hell. Everyone played ranked to avoid losers who rage quit or mic spammed. Which only adds to my point.

I loved halo as well but you're looking through rose tinted glasses.

Edit: remember, the goal is to have as many people with a 50% win rate as possible. If your wr is above 50 and you're complaining about SBMM, you're actually a fucking child.


xaria187 t1_ja9zywf wrote

I am good that’s why I hate sbmm. Only bad players benefit from it


Mrkancode t1_jaa2fns wrote

Lol. No. You started good and can't improve. That's why as your skill rank climbs, you get worse. The players you go against at higher ranks are legit better at getting better and that's why you feel worse. Theres a reason devs ignore you guys. You are a very small minority of the community and you're just yelling at the sky because you don't understand why everyone in the game doesn't die as soon as you look at them. It's a you issue. Be introspective for fucks sake. There's coaching vids for every game under the sun where this topic is discussed in detail. But you wouldn't know because you don't care about getting better. As far as you're concerned, you're the best. And that's the issue. You're not.


[deleted] t1_jaa4wgk wrote



Mrkancode t1_jaa608m wrote

Because it's universally been great for multiplayer. There's A GDC talk about how it has improved the overall performance of players across gaming in general because it forces players to adapt to remain competitive. But some people can't adapt and stay competitive. They don't know how to get good and then they throw a tantrum and tell everyone it's the games fault they got wrecked. Imagine being that immature. Must be embarrassing.


Rev1is t1_jabpv3f wrote

It takes only one higher skill player(doesnt even have to be top tier) to ruin the fun for new players. If you need to go on killstreaks agaisnt players who barely know how move around, make a custom lobby with bots.


DaveAndJojo t1_ja93t7o wrote

If you’re in the bottom 10% of players there’s a 90% chance you are going to get your ass handed to you without mmr.

Casual means exactly that. “Casual”.

Play casually. You will get easy lobbies and difficult lobbies. An issue I see is that many players take casual too seriously. When they’re down they switch to their sweat set up or main. They stop going for fun plays and start playing like it’s the MLG world championships because someone else is casually beating them.

Let go. If you lose, good! You get an easier lobby. If you win, good! Someone who is better than you will beat you.

If you fight to win every casual match you’re going to eventually get to the point where it feels like sloppy comp.


McTheoran OP t1_ja8s1ff wrote

Yes. That wouldn't be every game, and it never was back when. Having a entry level list/mode would be ideal for this.


PigeonOnDrugs t1_ja8r93w wrote

> Its interesting to get smashed every couple of games and have some good ones and have some bad ones.

Yes, but in most games it's not "some good and some bad ones".

If you're not very good yourself you'll just get stomper, over and over and over. It is not fun to join a lobby, enter a match and then die the first 20s in because someone with 3 times your playtime got matched against you.


bunnygum t1_ja8rm1q wrote

Not sure the genuine reason but if I had to guess, nobody wants a sweat goin nuclear in their lobby and stopping the more dogshit players from having fun. Imagine dropping a top ranked league player against just about any team of assorted low ranks and the game is basically decided on the spot completely ruining the fun for them, but that top rank player is having a fucking blast. Many people prefer not to bother even touch competitive either because it's well... competitive.


McTheoran OP t1_ja8sb61 wrote

Ah yes. Thats fair. I guess that also helps with smurf accounts.


DanFarrell98 t1_ja8sfqm wrote

It's not fun to get killed over and over with no chance of coming back. And it's not fun to kill everyone easily straight away (at least it gets old fast). In theory, SBMM allows for a fun middle ground. Of course its a very complicated system so it doesn't always work, but with time I think it will get better and better


Bananaslamma24 t1_ja8r9dm wrote

There is nothing casual about getting stomped by people with a much higher skill level than you. There's no working like crazy in a casual game. I genuinely do not understand how that is so hard for you people to grasp.


DaveAndJojo t1_ja97y75 wrote

I use to be one of them. I wanted to pub stomp in the old CODs but didn’t want to admit it. Comp (other games) gave me anxiety so I’d sweat casual playlists.

The issue is that some people don’t want to lose in casual so they fight to win every match. They end up in higher ranked players casual matches because of it.


Tistoer t1_ja8rs9q wrote

There are many millions of gamers who never had sbmm, but now the new gamers suddenly cry? Why the difference?


Bananaslamma24 t1_ja8shh5 wrote

Because sbmm made things so much better, that's why every almost every fps since 2007 has incorporated it and the genre boomed, games like CoD 4 appealed to everyone instead of just hardcore players.


Tistoer t1_ja8ssnd wrote

SBMM since 2007 made fair teams, not a full lobby of everyone with the exact same skill level.

It's CoD MW 2019 where it all went wrong and ruined gaming


Which-Palpitation t1_ja8t1j7 wrote

Did you really just say SBMM ruined gaming?


Tistoer t1_ja8t67i wrote

SBMM like implemented in MW 2019 and MW2 definitely ruined it for anyone older than 14


Which-Palpitation t1_ja8tdav wrote

I guess if your personality revolves around being a sweat then yeah I could see how a single feature ruined the entire medium for you


Tistoer t1_ja8u2ru wrote

It's just annoying to have zero progression, zero improvement, every single game the exact same, no variation, no goal.

It gets boring pretty after a few games.


DaveAndJojo t1_ja98a6i wrote

What games do you play?


Tistoer t1_ja9cp57 wrote

Used to play MW2, now mostly Rocket League and ACC


Bananaslamma24 t1_jaa3cyv wrote

Both of those games have SBMM...


Tistoer t1_jaa5rqq wrote

And ranks.

No one ever complained about sbmm in gamemodes with a rank or elo, that's the whole point of a rank.

However CoD now implements it in a casual non ranked game.


Catty_C t1_ja8t8xd wrote

Simplest answer is player engagement and retention.


ReinhartHartrein47 t1_ja8u0vu wrote

Im sorry guys but for someone that is right in the skill level between a casual player and people who do nothing but play the game SBMM is shit , it caters to the streamers who still somehow destroy pub games even with the so good sbmm and people who want to play duck hunt but with better visuals . For the people not believing me , I was plat/diamond in apex legends and got almost always cued with a full team of predators which are the best players in the world. It’s good for casual Carl and streaming Steve but for me it doesn’t work.


Judge216 t1_ja8v3lp wrote

I'd prefer no sbmm in casual modes like social slayer in halo 3. I'd rather get stomped sometimes and then do the stomping instead of just going 10 - 10 every game. What I don't understand is what is the point of ranked modes if essentially everything is ranked anyway with sbmm and it's just hidden. Atleast tell me what my rank is if there is sbmm.


Idrinkcamelspit t1_ja8vxv8 wrote

I’ve had games in mcc that I lose 50-8 and I got the 8 kills for my team. I’ve had games that we win 50-48 and I have 25+ kills, always a toss up. But playing against a full team of try hards always sucks. Getting camped with brs is tough


DoeCommaJohn t1_ja8x6a8 wrote

For every round you annihilate 10 players, there are 10 players having a less fun game getting annihilated, and that’s even before considering losing/winning because of a teammate


Pellahh t1_ja8xw3l wrote

Casual modes are for chilling, the target is mostly casual players/not competitive ones. Without SBMM, Someone who is in the bottom 20 would constantly lose most games as 80% of the playerbase is stronger than them.


-Shameem- t1_ja8ygq6 wrote

I'm not sure exactly how it's implemented in other games, but in the newer COD games it's so strict I often feel like I'm being punished for doing well, which is why I stopped trying to do well at all.


McTheoran OP t1_ja90qqg wrote

Yes this is exactly what I am referring. It is hardly noticeable in games like Halo and Overwatch but when it comes to COD it is insanely unbalanced, IMO.


ButterscotchLow8950 t1_ja8vtv7 wrote

The only thing I have noticed is that the casuals don’t want to play with the competitive players because it throws off the fire team stats and might put them in a higher skill lobby.

Otherwise I don’t really notice. They get easier match ups when we leave their fire team.


Manakuski t1_ja8ygu5 wrote

Because player retention and played time. Statistically sbmm systems (or these days engagement optimized matchmaking systems) are designed to keep you playing as long as possible.


BackDoorMan18 t1_ja8zjwd wrote

Everyone is approaching this from a "noob" perspective when the solution is easy. Group new players into the same matches for a couple dozen matches (varies on the game) and all the other players are in the same lobbies. It wouldn't help with smurfs, sure, but I'd say that smurfs would be less of an issue as there are more casual players than there are sweats in the lobbies. This would need some refining but it could easily work.

This would benefit everyone, because if the newbies are still really bad then they can play ranked and go against people of their own caliber, the majority of players are playing against each other at their own skill level instead of doing well in one match and getting placed in a high skill lobby, and the sweats can relax and mess around without having to compete against other sweats constantly.


ActuallyRyan10 t1_ja93583 wrote

It's kind of annoying for someone like me. It seems to not be able to find a place for me. I'll have a few games with lower level opponents and do well, then a game or two with markedly better people and get smoked. Rinse, repeat. I can never get consistent lobbies. Either I'm a good amount better or worse than average.

Maybe I'm just in a weird skill level range. I used to play shooters for hours on end in the Halo 2 and CoD4 days. Now I mainly play RPGs and single player stuff, but have retained some level of shooter skill. I'm also 31 now with a job and fiance and life.

So maybe I'm just better than your average gamer, but not nearly as good as streamers who do nothing but play so SBMM has a hard time placing me.

I just accept my fate if I've had a few 3+ K/D games in a row knowing that some team of kids who play 8 hours a day is coming for me.


McTheoran OP t1_ja95fq8 wrote

EXACTLY. I am right there with you. Halo 3 was my bread and butter my dude. I am now 27 with a kid, a small business, and a full time job on top of that. With the very few hours a week I get to play, I don't want to have to sweat just to NOT get my ass stomped completely. Like I said, I don't mind it every once in a bit but I don't like never being the top. If I am the top, its once a week, max, followed by endless games of destruction. Gaming, I am realizing, is only causal when you play it solo.


SpontanBatbro t1_jaa30sm wrote

Ah Halo 3 the game that first introduced SBMM into the series. Good times.


Xano74 t1_ja96jtk wrote

That's why I don't like smaller competitive games.

Take a game like Chivlary or battlefield and it's 60ish players of all varying skill levels in the same game. That's what's fun to me.


Excellent_Routine589 t1_ja9iy55 wrote

You also have to ask “how SBMM is being implemented” because it’s not as straightforward as one might think

The first confirmed pop up of SBMM in CoD, for example, was in Black Ops 3, where it is described in pretty good detail how it was to be implemented on its patent.

In that game, SBMM was to be leveraged to mix high skill players who spent a lot of MTXs into low tier lobbies so younger or more impressionable people might conflate having weapon skins to high tier play.

… the end goal is to push MTXs.

For more modern shooters, the argument is that it’s to balance retention with newer models of MTXs (mostly season passes).

At the end of the day, it’s a business model that aims to maximize the profitability of a game with maybe the silver lining that lobbies have a little more parity.

Source: used to play CoD for money, I have been aware of harder SBMM implementation since like… Advanced Warfare?


Tistoer t1_ja8ro7s wrote

Kids these days can't handle being bad at a game, it's not fun if they aren't dominating the lobby. If their first game isn't good, they quit the game.


DaveAndJojo t1_ja96g2c wrote

If your casual matches aren’t relaxing it’s because you’re taking it too seriously.

It’s okay to lose. Don’t sit up in your chair when they’re beating you. Don’t switch to your main or sweat build. Let it happen. Your mmr will drop and you’ll get into easier lobbies.

If you’re “working like crazy” you’re forcing yourself into more difficult matches. You’re playing against higher ranked players who are actually taking it casually.