this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2023
262 points (97.8% liked)

Gaming

3067 readers
331 users here now

!gaming is a community for gaming noobs through gaming aficionados. Unlike !games, we don’t take ourselves quite as serious. Shitposts and memes are welcome.

Our Rules:

1. Keep it civil.


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only.


2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry.


I should not need to explain this one.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month.


Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.



Logo uses joystick by liftarn

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I thought it tried to make games of all players of similar skill levels? Hence the rankings?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nope. It just says it does that.

Good players and bad players are both outliers. If you assign a numerical value to the players it’ll more likely try to balance the teams more than anything. I’ll put together an example.

P1: 100 - Best Player in the game

P2: 50 - Average Player

P3: 40 - Just below average

P4: 2 - Brand New to the game

To match these 4 players there’s only so many choices. Put P1 on a team with P2 or P3 and the other side is extremely disadvantaged. By putting P1 and P4 together, they average out to ~51. P2 and P3 average for ~45. The game thinks that’s a valid matchup, but really nobody is going to enjoy it.

This happens in both pubs and competitive modes because it maximizes “engagement” from the worst players, as they have a higher chance of being carried to a win when they’re put with the better players. Those also tend to be the ones who spend the most money, so these companies cater to them at the cost of enjoyment for everyone else.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Playing with people leagues better than you even if you are carried to a win sucks. In a lot of games you don't even get to actually play. You're dead before you get a shot off or never get to touch the ball or you fall off at the first obstacle and end not even getting to finish the race because you're so behind everyone else.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

That’s also true, and is often my experience in non-shooter games.

However it does work out that the lowest common denominator doesn’t care if they didn’t do anything. They’re just happy to win. The couch casuals aren’t ever going to be great, so their standard of a great game is much, much lower than anyone who plays daily or even every few days