Please, stop destroying multiplayer games.
Waiting
What is the worst thing in games in general? To me is having to wait to play like long loading screens, waiting queues, etc, anything that delay the game starting is overall really bad.
I don’t want to wait in a queue to join. It is bearable up to 1min at most. But some games put we in a waiting queue that varies from 5 to 30mins and that is totally absurd…
Warmup waiting
They dont even provide a good warmup room to help we stand waiting for the real match, the warmup (if it exists at all) are really bad, meaningless, challenge less, and we get nothing from it, we could get something from warmup rooms, why not?
We could gather something to help on the real match, we could even score a few points like a pre battle!
Bots fillup
Stop trying to fake we are playing against players, we are not that stupid, we know when we are playing against a bot. And you make it very clear when we can’t spectate them to confirm our suspicions!
So, if you are going to allow bots, why also force us into a waiting queue? To try to put a few players on the room?
Just start the damn room and let others join mid-game, it could be optional and place some disadvantage on the mid joiners. Invent something! But don’t put us in long waiting queues!
Specific games
I will comment about a few games later on how they end up destroying it by not understanding the core problem: do not make we wait!
But I am quite sure you have had to deal with these problems before too.
GridGremlin@lemmy.world 23 hours ago
The old arena shooters already solved this: on Quake III or UT99 servers you joined mid-match and spawned instantly, and short rounds meant the worst wait was a minute of spectating. Matchmaking traded that away for “fair” lobbies. Would you take worse balance for zero queue?
GussakThor@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
Btw, having many ongoing matches, and letting players join mid-match, would place them on the correct balanced match.
No need to break the balance, unless the player wants to not lose time on queue.
While a low rank player could chose higher rank matches, he would get a warning saying “that match is not suited for you, continue anyway?”
A higher skilled player would not be able to pester newbies, unless you implement a higher tier debuff.
So highly skilled players could be limited to low quality guns, movement hindering, low healing items, so then it would be a challenge for them VS newcomers that can use top quality equipment for that tier.
GussakThor@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
And to finalise, high tier players could request rooms that do not allow low toer players, even if that means higher matching balance waiting times, but then he could stop the matchmaking anytime and request a quick match if he gets too bored.
I mean, you are forcing on us pseudo balanced matches, even when we do NOT want it…
GussakThor@lemmy.world 20 hours ago
Thanks! I thought about that yesterday, forgot lol, now you helped me: ranked balanced matches.
Well… ranking is overall bad.
Everyone progress in the rank, what makes them spend money, this is a business trick that catches your money on the very begging when you start playing and still have hopes of becoming a legendary warrior 😁, but this doesn’t mean they play well…
Ranking should be based on your last 3 matches alone, because you may not be playing well, not aiming fast enough, not hitting that many shots, so your threat level shall be lowered to not bother who has played well recently.
But not only that. When it is about equipment power, it can be easily fixed:
GussakThor@lemmy.world 20 hours ago
An alternative would be at least to be able to spectate an ongoing match, but that is passive, like watching a video, you can’t even help who you are spectating by giving hints, nor talk in chat. So while ut is better than boring lobby wauting, it is still not good enough.