Segregation of Players by Skill is Discrimination, Says Halo Developer
The system of online player matching based on skill has been the subject of heated discussion for many years now. A former developer of multiplayer gameplay in the Halo series recently spoke on the matter, giving arguments against the controversial SBMM.
The issue of so-called skill-based matchmaking (SBMM), or a way of matching players to play together so that they are as similar as possible in terms of skill, returns like a boomerang in the public discourse on online video games - most often shooters. Their situation is tracked by an internal system based on their performance.
Former multiplayer mode developer at Bungie, Max Hoberman, spoke on the subject. He has started a thread on X, referring to an article published in PLAY Magazine (via GamesRadar), in which its author - Dashiell Wood - defends the SBMM system, which has been in place for many years in Call of Duty game (in every game listing) - to the disappointment of many fans, including streamers.
Hoberman stands in opposition to the aforementioned article, giving arguments against such an approach and talking about the way he himself designed multiplayer gameplay in Halo 2 and 3 - which was, in his opinion, the right solution.
Of course, he recognizes the clear need for two differentiated lists, i.e. ranked and normal. However, the creator allowed for a certain - quite wide - range of player selection even in this competitive-oriented list for points.
The developer is, of course, aware that matches between players of similar skill levels are the most fun, however, he added that it's nice sometimes to feel the superiority of their skill over others.. For this reason, he created a clever system - within ranked games - that would offer all the "experiences" of competition, i.e. decisive victories, devastating defeats and evenly matched clashes.
"By intentionally allowing you to match a range of skills, we provided three experiences for ranked players; an easier one where you can kick ass, a harder one where you are likely to be defeated, and leveled. My theory was that a good combination of the three is ideal."
What is Hoberman's explanation? He adheres to the principle that playing almost exclusively leveled games is often associated with stress. This type of matches usually accompanies the SBMM system, and some people just want to feel pure pleasure in the game once in a while, without giving up the ranking list.
"The failure of modern skill-based matchmaking is that it is designed to maximize these ideal match scenarios and minimize others. When it works, most games become very tense and stressful. It's not fun for most players. Where is the variability?
The system I designed for ranking lists provided a healthy mix. Sure, it sucks to watch your team get beat. However, everything changes when it's your opponents who get hit. Throw in fierce, evenly matched matches from time to time, and together it makes for a lot of fun."
The former Bungie developer also referred to the normal list of games, in which he believes SBMM should play a completely marginal role. This mode of competition does not involve earning any points for the overall ranking, so in its nature, as it were, it is "written" to inconsistently select players whose individual skills would not exclude from playing together just for the fun of it.
Moreover, he recognized that skill-based segregation in this mode would be a kind of discrimination. After all, the random selection of players "on normals" ensures a quick search for gameplay, which should be the "clou" of this list of games.
"Separating high-skill players from the general population and forcing them to wait a long time [to play - ed. note] is a form of discrimination. Developers should strive to find ways in which players of all skill levels can have fun. A random, irrelevant non-ranking matchmaking system is one way to do it."
The discussion on SBMM will probably drag on for a long time (or maybe even indefinitely), because the skill-based player selection system has almost as many opponents as supporters. And you, which option do you favor? Let us know in the comments below this post.
