Thread 2028202

It feels impossible to enjoy any multiplayer game because everyone has thousands of hours of playtime. Even at 400 hours in a multiplayer game you still are a noob in comparison to the majority of players. It takes so fucking ridiculously long to have even the slightest chance of winning in virtually every game. Even co-op games are filled with insane sweats. If you want to do end game fights in an mmo you have to spend hundreds of hours just to get to end game and then the end game becomes a second job. And then when you become ok at the game, you can only win if you sweat at 130% sweat EVERY SINGLE GAME. It's so exhausting. There's no chill any more.

There's countless players like you (below average) in every lobby of every game that still have fun. The difference between them and you is you want everything (absurd unrealistic shit like winning every game) while putting in zero effort.

Keep this shit to yourself as it's genuinely embarrassing.

Or maybe try something a tad less competitive like that horsegirl game, or (mostly) noncompetitive/cooperative like elite dangerous.
Maybe this whole all-out competition thing just isn't for you.

>>2028319
OP is not totally wrong.

I shouldn't have to be subject to loading up BF6 and being fucking ass fucked by 2 squads of people on the enemy team who very clearly are unemployed while my team is fucking retards.

I'm fairly decent, but for the most part, a lot of gamers are fucking stupid, and I have to hard carry most of my games. Just wish there was more instances where I didn't have to do the thinking for at least 15 other fucking braindead retards.

That being said, Twitch Streaming and "gaming as a career" has fucking irreparably ruined gaming for most casual gamers. Although I suspect BF6 has skill based match making in it.

>Read OP's post more
Oh yea, I actually had this issue playing no more room in hell 2. I'm either paired with absolute fucking morons who can't get past the easiest difficulty and get me killed, or fucking unemployed losers who speed run every level and actually make the normal mode difficult.

>>2028202 (OP)
Hey OP, the answer is fucking unemployed losers. They're unemployed.

I'm starting to wonder if getting other hobbies is more worth it.

>>2028202 (OP)
the problem is centralized matchmaking and this insistence that video games are a job now. 20 years ago shit like this wasn't a problem. you'd be in a server of mixed skill levels, if you were getting dumpstered on there were probably noobs on the enemy team you could squish and if your team was losing next round there'd be shuffle or maybe a good player would sign on and be on your team. but now it's all MMRslop algorithm forced 50/50 engagement chasing bullshit so it's always putting you against players better than you with no breathing room until you hit that forced ratio. i don't play games with matchmaking systems anymore, they're all trash.

>>2028597
>I shouldn't have to be subject
Is anyone forcing you?

>>2029399
Not sure if you can read or you're retarded. But OP is explicitly complaining about mixed skill levels in his lobbies. An MMR system would save a stupid shitter like OP and yourself from misery.

blud came into the thread just to be mad lmao

>>2029641
good morning saar

>>2028202 (OP)
The problems began once they started using ranked matchmaking algorithms for casual games under the guise of making "more fair" matches. Competitive matchmaking doesn't care if you have even matches, it cares if you win 50% of the time. You can accomplish this far more reliably by alternating between wood rank and masters matches. Granted it's not generally this extreme, but that's the pattern that creates the issue, for it to balance you there comes an inevitable point where your input has no bearing on the match anymore. You will experience the same amount of success whether you're one of the best players in the world or one of the worst. Sure that's balanced, but it's not satisfying unless you are literally the greatest player on your continent. When server browsers still worked you could go into the ranked rooms and try to be the very best, or you could just find a local community and try to be one of the best in your city, or some random online community. I used to be one of the best players on a random CS:Source server, by global standards I was probably just average, maybe slightly above. Once things went global that feeling of progress was gone and so was the community that facilitated it. It would lead to more lopsided matches, but so what? Matchmaking does too, at least on the servers you could just leave if you were getting creamed and the game would balance itself. You stomp a team, they leave, you switch to their team and stomp your team. Or you get stomped and go find a server more in your range. But that's gone now, games can't be casually competitive anymore. Either you're aiming for #1 in the world or you're a dope for even participating, that's what it's come to.
1/2

>inb4 they've re-added server browsers and nobody uses them
they have entire engagement mills they are left out from and most of the community ignores them so they end up dead, the fact is the money men have an incentive to neglect those and they do. The landscape of gaming has been changed and you don't just slap a browser onto it and undo the damage anymore. There was no reason for things like leaver penalties in older games, because there was no engagement mill to be sabotaged by people leaving prematurely. These sorts of practices are also, with the help of the hyper-competitive atmosphere bred by the matchmaking systems, the major part of turning communities more persistently toxic. Yes toxic people have always been around, but games didn't used to turn normal people toxic, it was something other people brought in on their own and when you met it, you just left, you chose to engage with them, now you're punished for trying to avoid them. League says you have to sit in a game with them for at minimum 20 min and they get to dictate your outcome. It's a recipe for breeding toxicity in people that aren't innately toxic.
It's been a daisy chain of deliberate cultural shifts to get people to consume more at the expense of the culture, community and atmosphere of games with any competitive potential.
2/2

>>2028202 (OP)
Agree OP
The only advice I can give you is either to play solo on games that allow it (say playing some sort of rogue in a MMO and killing random people outside), or just play 1v1 games like RTS or fighting games
I had mostly bad experiences with team games in general, even outside of video games. Like IRL I was bad at soccer in school and my teammates would get angry at my mistakes
That's why I always prefered solo sports like riding my BMX doing some simple tricks (even with friends around it's still a solo and chill activity) or swimming
Some may say I should grow a thicker skin but I don't care anymore, video games are supposed to be fun not something that makes me stressed

Stop playing team based multiplayer games. 1v1 and FFA is all you need. No bullshit, either you win or you lose based on your own merit.

Games were always like that, the only difference is you stomped as you get better because it was the wild west, now with SBMM no matter how bad or good you are you always have to play as hard as ever to win, because your MMR is the result of you winning and losing while trying hard. You'd have to consistently not try to end up at a lower MMR for it not to be the case.

>>2037180
I miss when team based multiplayer games didn't mean "strictly small scale 5v5 fights in a hyper competitive ranked environment", like, can we start getting casual 8v8 and 16v16+ games again that aren't just battlefield for the 12th time?

>>2037281
I like both but the big scale ones have been really lacking outside of TF2 and Battlefield for a while. I think it started when CS:GO followed up CS:S by making 5v5, which started as an unofficial community-organized gamemode, into the default way to play the game and then even 'casual' mode is 10v10 at most despite CS and CS:S having 32+ player servers.

>>2037219
And for casual players that's a disaster since it punishes success and rewards failure. There's nothing casual about that.

>>2037697
Hmm it only "punishes" success I think in games that don't find players for matches based on skill level first but instead find random players then sort them in teams according to skill level to try and make things even, putting the higher skilled players on either team into a situation where they kinda have to carry. But those games still preserve the king of the server effect of pre-SSBM, so it's a pretty good trade-off IMO..and it lets lower skill players play against like and the high skill players at the same time, which is more or less how it's always been, just with closer matches on average.