• assaultpotato@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    As much as that may be true for you, on average people enjoy MP games with SBMM more than without by a decent margin. Studies have shown that people play more matches and play longer sessions when SBMM creates more balanced matches.

    • BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      personally not for me once i start getting destroyed by people leagues above my skill level i just stop playing

      there’s rarely ever games that are even, i either cream the opposing noobs or get creamed by the opposing pros. no in between

    • Ogmios@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      You absolutely certain about that reasoning? Because from what I’ve seen, when automated matchmaking is used, you NEED to play the game like a job just to reach your “correct” ranking and actually enjoy the game. People who don’t play it like that are driven away because of it.

      • assaultpotato@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        If you’re curious about the mechanics behind ELO and ELO confidence distributions after X matches, chess ELO is actually a well studied way to learn about the algorithm used by almost all SBMM. After a shockingly small number of matches, your ELO is going to end up being in the right neighborhood for you have +/- 50% WR.

      • assaultpotato@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yes, I am.

        This is just one study I could find quickly but the results are consistent.

        https://www.pcgamer.com/games/activision-secretly-experimented-on-50-of-call-of-duty-players-by-decreasing-skill-based-matchmaking-and-determined-players-like-sbmm-even-if-they-don-t-know-it/

        Because from what I’ve seen, when automated matchmaking is used, you NEED to play the game like a job just to reach your “correct” ranking and actually enjoy the game.

        This is not accurate. Most people’s ELOs don’t shift much after settling into your “natural” rank, which should happen after about 50 matches or so. Probably what you’re referring to is the publicly available “rank” which is per “season”, wherein every few months your rank gets reset. This is FAR less opaque than SBMM but results in lower playtime and lower retention for casual players who don’t want to be grinding the 50 matches to settle at their ELO every 3 months.

        Actual opaque SBMM (the algorithm you mentioned originally) that never resets creates, on average, much more fun MP experiences for most people.

        • homoludens@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Most people’s ELOs don’t shift much after settling into your “natural” rank, which should happen after about 50 matches or so.

          Ehm, 50 matches seems like a lot to me. Especially if they aren’t enjoyable (yet) because of flawed matchmaking.

          • assaultpotato@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            I pulled that number out of my bootyhole because I knew it was a safe bet for a stable ELO.

            US Chess Federation uses 25 games as your provisional ELO stage, many video games will use 10 matches. Assuming a large enough variety of ELO in the player base, you can be confident your ELO is mostly accurate after a shockingly small number of matches.