I have a conspiracy about Video Game Matchmaking. I'm a good player, I play the objective, I help my team whenever I can, I have moderate to good aiming skills, I have a good sense of where other players are most of the time, I pay attention to how my team plays and navigate myself to cover whatever weakness is getting us blown up as best we can. I mean I cover all the bases, which doesn't mean I am great but should mean I am a competent player.
So I Should get queued up with other players of that capacity... Right? Well, it doesn't feel that way.
I play the exact same game with my gaming friends but whenever they tell me their stories and they describe the players they are matched with it seems like they are in a totally different group of players. They have, of course, their own playstyle, strengths, and weaknesses but are generally at a similar skill level to me. So how do they get matched with these wildly different players?
Arc Raiders developer Embark Studios brought up a point a few months back that they DO separate player matchmaking based on PVP/PVE tendencies and how players interact. So there is one point that matchmaking is controlled beyond the players gameplay.
I thought about how in the past Blizzard entertainment has stated that in their newer games (Hearthstone and Heroes of the Storm) they try and keep a player at a 50% winrate to make things fair for everyone. So that is another point towards them shifting the tides to be unfavorable and the player has no control over that element.
But what does a player have control of? Their interactions in the chat, When/If they get reported or use the report button on others. Things of that nature.
It made sense. among some of my friends it goes down like this:
one is super toxic in chat, always berating and placing blame on the team. They get nothing but similarly toxic players on their team.
The 2nd is friendly in chat with their team. Always cheering on their teammates no matter win or lose and cracking jokes during the match. They get matched up with friendly players who are similar.
I am something of a passive player, although I've heard the term 'Sterile player' before, because I don't utilize the chatbox. I do report trolls or toxic players to a degree but generally leave players, either good skillset or bad, alone.
I used to communicate in chat ALOT when I was younger. I wasn't directly 'toxic' by todays standard. I wouldn't directly assault others. But I would generally critique others by being specifically vague (If that makes sense) where I wouldn't name the player but would criticize the gear or movement used. I would mock what others said in chat, again not directly at them but just a general summarization of what was written in a dumb format, and often times point out flaws in the team composition or strategy without compromise.
My responses would get a lot of participation because others would agree, some would recognize I was talking about them, and the rest just didn't like anybody using the chatbar while they were having their moment.
Although in the 2010s there were news reports popping up of players locating offensive players and directly harming them. It was all fun and games until player 1 pops player 2 in the head over slight misconduct. I wasn't overly toxic but again, it doesn't take much for somebody to go on a manhunt, so I slowly ceased most communication in a game. Sort of being the 'emotionless' player in the lobby.
Voice chat was an option? I disabled it. Players were throwing shade at eachother or myself? i wouldn't join in. I limited myself to a ping only communication type. Not spamming pings but just a general 'headsup' indicator for others to notice.
Being a 'ping' only communicator in games is cool and all but it is not really 'player interaction'
So going back to my conspiracy: I think how you interact with other players puts your matchmaking in a position to be paired up with similar communicative players. Being toxic? Go in the toxic bracket. Being friendly? Play with the other friendly players. Neither toxic nor friendly? Well, you get put in there with the players who haven't been selected or chosen a bracket to be in.
In my view, It's a double edged sword if you look at how these brackets work. Toxic players are generally more 'into' the game but, of course, are toxic. They will absolutely blow up at any error and tend to gloat needlessly over ridiculous things win or lose as long as it is better than the person they have directed their toxicity towards.
Friendly players are great to keep playing matches with but they fall into a rhythm of just playing to play. They would like to win but would probably keep their intensity to a simmer.
Both have a medium of skill that is above average either due to continued play or committing to the game with all their will/focus.
Me, in my 'non-affiliated' bracket are finding my matches stuck with both players types but generally on the lower skill end. It's okay at first but eventually the skill difference between my team and the enemy team is definitively different.
So back to my conspiracy: Because I don't thrust enough emotion, either friendly or aggressive, into a game and just play it 'silently' the matchmaker has no idea where to put me and just places me in its 'pre-identified' bracket. I mean, it is the only thing I can tell that is different from me and my friends.
2 Companies admitted to factoring in player participation in matchmaking or other variables that their matchmaking adheres to, so how can I actively change what type of players I get matched with? It's obviously not the skill level of play but my interaction with others in the chat.
Sounds crazy, I even thought about making a tinfoil hat but it does make a semblance of sense... To me.
So my experiment in some games will get me out of my virtual shell and have me interacting with players again. Will it be worth it? Probably not but it'll be fun to get back into typing out my 'general' comments.
