Here’s something you might not have known, and that is Halo 2 and 3 both featured SBMM (skilled-based matchmaking) though implementation wasn’t quite as obvious as it has been recently in other franchises. This was revealed by the former lead designer of both games, chiming into the whole SBMM debate that has surfaced yet again with Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3, and even going so far as saying the system discriminates by opposing restrictions on high-skilled players. 

In a lengthy X thread, Former Halo 2 and 3 Lead Designer and current Founder and CEO of Certain Affinity, Max Hoberman, opened up about SBMM in the Halo games, explaining how he tried to balance it out to promote fun, and ensured certain systems weren’t in place for unranked modes.

What I implemented cleanly divided the space into Ranked and Unranked matchmaking playlists. Ranked filtered opponents based on level. This was for when you wanted a competitive match – but even then, I intentionally allowed variability in the range of levels we matched you with.

This variability was a topic of hot debate internally, during development, 20 years ago. Obviously no one wants to get stomped continuously. On the flip side, it gets dull (for most people) continuously stomping others. However, it IS fun having the upper hand some of the time.

By intentionally allowing a range of skills to match together, we provided 3 experiences in ranked matchmaking: an easier one where you can kick butt, a harder one where you’re likely outmatched, and an evenly matched one. My theory was that a good mix of these three was ideal.

He goes on to explain why they didn’t just always evenly match player skills, citing that these would always produce the most stressful of matches. 

The failure of modern skill-based matchmaking, imho, is that it’s designed to maximize these perfect match scenarios and minimize the others. When it’s working, a majority of games become super tight, super stressful. That’s not fun for most players. Where’s the variability?

The system that I designed for Ranked playlists ensured a healthy mix. Sure, it sucks watching your favorite team get their butt kicked. But it comes full circle when they’re the ones kicking butt. Throw in tight, evenly matched games every so often, and that’s a ton of fun.

I haven’t even gotten to Unranked playlists yet. I designed these to NOT factor in skill/level in the search for opponents. Yes, our engineers utilized the same codebase and kept skill/level as a search criteria, but we substantially de-prioritized it in matchmaking.

We also didn’t track skill/level globally, only per-playlist. The net result was that Unranked matchmaking allowed a very wide range of skill levels to match together for what everyone agreed was casual, inconsequential fun. Again, that’s the way it should be, in my opinion.

Hoberman closes off by touching upon forced long wait times for high skilled players, calling it a form of discrimination and that devs shouldn’t take the easy way out.

Segregating high skill players from the population at large, forcing long wait times on them, is a form of discrimination. Designers should strive to find a way that players of all skill levels can have fun together. Casual, inconsequential Unranked matchmaking is one way.