Objective reasoning why skill based matchmaking is dumb

#101vigorm0rtisPosted 11/25/2012 2:29:35 PM
Astro_B0mb posted...

Lmao you must be new to the video game world if you think cod is competitive.


Been gaming for 30+ years, and if it's a game where two teams are placed in a match and the objective is to win, it is, by definition, competitive.

DERP
---
Protip: If you don't see gorilla coming he's already behind you, lotion bottle in hand. --CaPwnd
#102VauntXPosted 11/25/2012 2:30:28 PM
What the f*** is so hard to understand about "I don't have fun putting up s***ty scores"? Did you f***ing read that entire post? It's not fun to me. Maybe it's fun for you and if so more power to you but I just explained why it's not fun to me, and if you're incapable of understanding the subjectivity of the word fun then you're dimmer than I thought, which is really saying something.

It isn't stats. The only stat I care about is my rank in league play, and as a Masters rank I'm not concerned with that at the moment. It's performance per individual game. It is not fun for me to die repeatedly. Finally killing someone does not make up for dying to him four times in a row like it used to when I was bad. I want to kill him the first time and not die, because it's frustrating.


I would assume that nobody really enjoys that at all. You're crying out for a system that inflicts the very thing you hate on a lot of people. Unbelievable.
#103fatclemenza(Topic Creator)Posted 11/25/2012 2:33:49 PM
From: VauntX | #102
I would assume that nobody really enjoys that at all. You're crying out for a system that inflicts the very thing you hate on a lot of people. Unbelievable.

Its a different story for someone who actually strives to do good rather than someone who just plays for the sake of playing (i.e. bads)
---
He's a well respected man about town,
Doing the best things so conservatively
#104vigorm0rtisPosted 11/25/2012 2:40:54 PM
fatclemenza posted...

Its a different story for someone who actually strives to do good rather than someone who just plays for the sake of playing (i.e. bads)


I'd assume that even people who play for the sake of playing like to win more than lose. And you're not 'striving to do good.' 'Striving' implies effort, which is the very thing you're trying to avoid.
---
Protip: If you don't see gorilla coming he's already behind you, lotion bottle in hand. --CaPwnd
#105wow_just_wow1Posted 11/25/2012 3:45:02 PM
People who ague against SBMM continue to completely miss the point of it and for that reason their objective reasoning fails. It is not about "bad" players who will play no matter what and be happy with getting one trick shot kill. It's not about making bad players good.

It is about players who would like to do well, but can't and give up. This is for the people who purchase the game and play the campaign. Yet, they go into multiplayer and cannot get going because they get into lobbies and get killed repeatedly. It's not fun for them, so they give up and do something else. Maybe they get a few hours of MP play in. What do you think the likelihood is that these people purchase DLC?

The longer you can keep people playing a video game, the more money you can make off of them. This is about getting new customers for DLC. It's an attempt to get people who weren't playing very much to play more.

League play or ranked matches is not an argument against SBMM in public matches. People who are new and not good are not going to go into a lobby labeled "League Play" or a "Ranked" lobby. They just aren't. League play isn't really skill-based for an individual player in this game anyway. It's entirely based on wins and losses. That works well for teams, but for an individual player it's fairly dependent on who you are randomly matched up with.

Almost every online game has some sort of SBMM. No one has a problem with it and it's generally expected that games will have it to some degree or another. If you want people to keep playing a game, you don't match skilled players with noobs. That's a simple truism that's not even debatable in any type of game that matches humans against humans.

I understand that some people are upset because CoD was the one game that didn't do this. But, it's a business decision they have made to do it now. It will not change, no matter how much you complain because it is almost certain that Activision has data that makes this a good business decision so that they can make more money.
#106VauntXPosted 11/25/2012 3:52:02 PM
It isn't stats. The only stat I care about is my rank in league play, and as a Masters rank I'm not concerned with that at the moment. It's performance per individual game.

Does anyone else find this hilarious given that he's just been called out in another thread for dashboarding?
#107FeelMyBladePosted 11/25/2012 3:54:52 PM
Astro_B0mb posted...
vigorm0rtis posted...
fatclemenza posted...
From: vigorm0rtis | #030
I know. If people don't want competition,

Might as well stop you there, since the rest is baseless assumptions, and I never said I never wanted competition. Its fun on the odd game to get someone on the other team you can trade blows with. I've played against Socrates in CoD4 and those were some fun matches that went down to the wire.


You don't want consistent competition. Playing a competitive game.

Assumptions baseless.

Right.


Lmao you must be new to the video game world if you think cod is competitive.


You must have never won a single match in your entire miserable life.
---
brohoof anyone? ^-^ /) ? No. of Brohoofs-35
I reward Cool users with a Cool Prize. Wait list: 2, Given:12
#108Jimm3rF3rdettePosted 11/25/2012 4:06:03 PM
David Vonderhaar ‏@DavidVonderhaar

"No matter what you forum post you read or what YT video you watched, connection is king at all times above all other criteria"

*this is implying the sudden outcry about sbmm, im guessing he has been getting a lot of tweets now that alot of people have discovered that this game does in fact use it.


_____________________________


can people please tweet him and call his bluff? After testing a few different scenarios out yesterday, i am 100% convinced SBMM exists, but Vahn is just denying it.
#109wow_just_wow1Posted 11/25/2012 4:08:57 PM
Jimm3rF3rdette posted...
David Vonderhaar ‏@DavidVonderhaar

"No matter what you forum post you read or what YT video you watched, connection is king at all times above all other criteria"

*this is implying the sudden outcry about sbmm, im guessing he has been getting a lot of tweets now that alot of people have discovered that this game does in fact use it.


_____________________________


can people please tweet him and call his bluff? After testing a few different scenarios out yesterday, i am 100% convinced SBMM exists, but Vahn is just denying it.


He's not denying SBMM. He's just saying connection is a more important factor in matchmaking.
#110Jimm3rF3rdettePosted 11/25/2012 4:10:44 PM
wow_just_wow1 posted...
Jimm3rF3rdette posted...
David Vonderhaar ‏@DavidVonderhaar

"No matter what you forum post you read or what YT video you watched, connection is king at all times above all other criteria"

*this is implying the sudden outcry about sbmm, im guessing he has been getting a lot of tweets now that alot of people have discovered that this game does in fact use it.


_____________________________


can people please tweet him and call his bluff? After testing a few different scenarios out yesterday, i am 100% convinced SBMM exists, but Vahn is just denying it.


He's not denying SBMM. He's just saying connection is a more important factor in matchmaking.


yes, but that's still bull crap. skill plays a more important factor than connection. fact.