Because it's universally been great for multiplayer. There's A GDC talk about how it has improved the overall performance of players across gaming in general because it forces players to adapt to remain competitive. But some people can't adapt and stay competitive. They don't know how to get good and then they throw a tantrum and tell everyone it's the games fault they got wrecked. Imagine being that immature. Must be embarrassing.

Lol. No. You started good and can't improve. That's why as your skill rank climbs, you get worse. The players you go against at higher ranks are legit better at getting better and that's why you feel worse. Theres a reason devs ignore you guys. You are a very small minority of the community and you're just yelling at the sky because you don't understand why everyone in the game doesn't die as soon as you look at them. It's a you issue. Be introspective for fucks sake. There's coaching vids for every game under the sun where this topic is discussed in detail. But you wouldn't know because you don't care about getting better. As far as you're concerned, you're the best. And that's the issue. You're not.

>The arguement that a low skill player is gonna quit the game because they get stomped by someone much better in a random lobbey is silly because if they want to be matched against someone their skill level they can play RANKED.

This is redundant. Casual players play casual modes to avoid competitive play. You are suggesting more casual players should play more competitive modes to avoid casual games.

>hell. A person who is gonna quit the game after getting stomped is not the player to cater to, trying to protect them is silly, they are not gonna sustain the game.

This is a straw man. This isn't about retaining new players. It's about providing a consistent experience for everyone who plays it across the board in as many situations as possible.

>just miss the halo 3 days of ranked social split where social was the wild west.

Yeah this was super cool except the lobbies would have to reset and we would spend 45 seconds loading because a salty player left the game and the whole time the host could just walk around and rack up kills on everyone while the rest of the lobby was black screened. That's why myself and probably you too rarely touched social because it was toxic as hell. Everyone played ranked to avoid losers who rage quit or mic spammed. Which only adds to my point.

I loved halo as well but you're looking through rose tinted glasses.

Edit: remember, the goal is to have as many people with a 50% win rate as possible. If your wr is above 50 and you're complaining about SBMM, you're actually a fucking child.

>The likelihood is low.

No it isn't. You're wrong.

>Connection based matchmaking has always been more fun.

No it isn't. You're wrong.

Git gud.

Castle Super beast, fire escape cast and friends per second is what I've been listening to lately.

No. You just don't understand how much 1 good player can carry a multiplayer game.

Every time I hear people complain about SBMM now I think about that leaked DM of the YouTuber who wanted to trick terminally ill kids into playing cod with him so he could get the best clips for his YouTube channel due to them being unable to play the game properly.

There is a way higher percentage of lower skilled players than high skill players. With no SBMM then medium to high skill players can take advantage of the randomness to steamroll players who don't have a chance. If this is "fun" for you, go play single player.

Put on an eye patch.