Sledgehammer Games may be positioning itself as the studio that’s listening to its fanbase when it comes to Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3. Still, there’s one stance that they’ve carried forward with this year’s iteration: keeping a stone face around any mention of the game’s skilled-based matchmaking system (SBMM) that everyone knows exists.
Sledgehammer Games is already proving to be far more communicative regarding Call of Duty than any other studio before, being transparent on as many things as possible. They’ve already spoken in a few podcasts and video interviews, taking community questions, and recently, they did an ask me anything on Reddit, allowing the community to have their burning questions seen finally (which you can read a summarized version here).
They answered plenty of those questions, and yet, no matter how nicely worded they were, the studio has continued to ignore discussion around the skilled-based matchmaking system.
It’s a hot topic, and understandably, the studio probably doesn’t want to say the wrong thing about it. But it’s been a topic at the top of the community list of things to address for the better part of the decade, with the recent Modern Warfare reboot series seemingly having the worst of it.
For those who aren’t in the loop, essentially, the system works to place players in lobbies with players of the same skill bracket. It isn’t a bad idea, as it ultimately promotes fair play (on paper) amongst players. However, many in the community can agree that the system that Call of Duty has used to determine player skills and the lobbies they’ve been in has created massive skill gaps. Matches often end up being “sweaty.” No one asking to stomp other players or be stomped, most just want to have fun instead of constantly feeling like they’re in a professional-level match.
This has even broken friends from playing with one another, as the SBMM is so strong that often, it’ll group up with players who meet the skill level of the best player in their party. I know I have this issue whenever I play with a certain staff member, as their matches are always some of the worst I’ve been in.
But even outside of that, it always feels like for every ten matches, one or two of them are appropriately matched with players in my skill bracket. Mind you, some of those matches I’m thinking about are ones we’ve lost, yet they were still fun to play.
Some community members have resorted to reverse boosting, purposely killing their stats to play in fairer or easier lobbies.
While many theorize on why no studio will talk about it (mostly the higher-ups and how it is potentially tied to monetization), the community has undoubtedly been fed up with this issue to the point that it shouldn’t be ignored anymore.
So, seeing that the studios are owned by Microsoft now and how Sledgehammer Games has been “open” on many subjects, it’s surprising (and not surprising) to see even them ignore the questions. It’s almost as if it’s some guarded secret that every player knows well.
What’s more funny here is that every single year, players complain about cheaters and hackers, which led to the eventual creation of RICOCHET back in 2021 for Warzone and mainline Call of Duty games. The company doesn’t divulge its inner workings, but since its launch, they have announced what it does during games and how players can spot cheaters and such with it. A system meant to counter hackers and cheaters while also telling them exactly what they’re doing to show it’s working.
Think about that: the studios and publishers would rather make cheaters and hackers aware of how they’re combating them instead of shedding a single piece of info over the SBMM system, including how they’re taking players’ feedback in addressing it. It’s ironic because, typically, you wouldn’t want those cheaters to know why something is happening. They’re more in the loop with something that should be “hidden” than legit players are over a system that affects everyone.
All the community wants is acknowledgment and for a serious discussion to happen around it. We know they won’t make everyone happy with it, but for an iteration that is seemingly “listening” to the community by reverting to how things were, SBMM (or engagement-optimized matchmaking, EOMM, if that’s what’s being used) is a discussion that needs to happen. If improvements are going to be made, I think the players should know about them, and vice-versa with other changes made.
This isn’t about letting players curb stomp in every lobby they play in. SBMM is supposed to help balance that out, but the execution since Modern Warfare 2019 has been the most obvious, and not in a good way, we’ve experienced in a COD game thus far. I don’t even want to get into the whole connection side of things, as I’m sure some have noticed ping jumping from a low 30-50ms to suddenly 200ms, all because SBMM wants to pair you with higher-skilled players, regardless of how they route your connection (pings be damned!).
And I want to be clear: I don’t have problems with the idea of SBMM. It makes a lot of sense, at least on paper, but its execution isn’t good. Sure, I have more fun in matches where I’m hitting the top of the boards and outplaying everyone in the lobby, but SBMM is also supposed to balance that out. Instead, I, and probably a majority of players, are finding that the skill gap it places us in is far wider than it should be. I remember a time when, even though I was losing, I was still having fun. That has nothing to do with outgrowing Call of Duty, as there are other games with less aggressive SBMM where that fun factor in losing still exists.
SBMM has been and always will be a hot topic, but it’s time for the Call of Duty studios to start talking about it. I’ll go back on the suspicions of it being tied to monetization and them changing it or “fixing” it would result in less money, thus why they won’t talk about it. But how long can that go for? How long before the player base is so fed up with it that they flock elsewhere? Call of Duty as an IP is resilient but not immortal. It will always look for ways to make more money. SBMM might be its latest money-puller, but why does it come at the expense of so many in the community? I can tell you that the current system doesn’t make me want to spend or invest more, if not the opposite. That’s not the case for everyone; I could be in the minority, but I do like to think otherwise with how many have complained every year and how Call of Duty is mainly an online game.
SBMM is Call of Duty’s worst-kept secret, and it’s time Activision stops thinking it’s one.
Opinion voiced here is that solely of the author’s and does not represent MP1st and its staff in its entirety.
More Call of Duty Reading:
Ya, SBMM, has completely ruin COD. Used to love jumping in playing hours upon hours in a lobby trying to one up each other in Free-For-All. But now with SBMM lobbies get disbanded after one match that makes for a boring game where I lose interest after 30 minutes. I will not buy another COD until disbanding of lobbies stops. MW1 was last one I bought. Had great gameplay and maps, but was boring after 38 hours. I just go to WWII (2017) to get my COD fix. 1111 hours currently in that one due to no lobby disbanding. IP now is just boring, stop disbanding I’d gladly buy a new COD.
Another crybaby complaining about not being able to beat up on less invested players. I hope you actually play a sport some day.
Yeah I agree, the only people complaining about SBMM are the sweats themselves because they can’t just run around and stomp everyone and have a 8K/D. I’m not the best at the game and I have no problems ith the way it is.