Avatar

Interesting article in Forbes about matchmaking (Destiny)

by CruelLEGACEY @, Toronto, Monday, June 01, 2015, 17:57 (2151 days ago)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2015/06/01/if-bungie-built-destiny-around-groups...

Some interesting stuff in here. There's a quote from Deej addressing the many requests for in-game matchmaking for high-level activities:

"At current, our philosophy about endgame content is that part of the challenge includes forming up a team."

To which the article counters:

"If you’ve designed a game around group-based endgame activities, part of your challenge as a developer is figuring out how to get players together in case not everyone has five spare friends with the same console and unlimited free time lying around. It’s not the player’s responsibility to combat this glaring issue on your behalf."

Anyway, some good thoughts and good suggestions in here. I think we've all seen these suggestions before, but it's well presented.

Avatar

Interesting article in Forbes about matchmaking

by Vortech @, A Fourth Wheel, Monday, June 01, 2015, 18:44 (2151 days ago) @ CruelLEGACEY

Without reading the article I will say that even if matchmaking is not the answer (and I'm willing to buy that) they still should be pumping WAY more resources into making it easier to form a team. Let me see who is online from my guild. Let me set a want to play/need help flag with opt-in visibility to all online friends and guild mates. Let me queue up to join friend between rounds of crucible or strike playlist. Increase max fire team size for many activities but e low hanging fruit would probably be patrol.

Avatar

Interesting article in Forbes about matchmaking

by Schedonnardus, Texas, Monday, June 01, 2015, 19:22 (2151 days ago) @ Vortech

also, tell me what my friends are doing when i "mouse-over" their names.

right now it either says "online" or "online playing destiny"

if their bar is black, then i know that they are doing something else

if their bar has their emblem, then i already know that they are playing destiny

have the mouse-over show me what they are doing in destiny and X/Y players (2/3, 4/6, etc). Then if i want to see who all is in the party, or if i want to join them, then i can click on them.

Having to click on every single person in my friend's list all the time just to see what they are doing is annoying.

Avatar

you do get the box with the arrow for those you can join

by slycrel ⌂, Monday, June 01, 2015, 19:23 (2151 days ago) @ Schedonnardus

- No text -

Avatar

you do get the box with the arrow for those you can join

by Schedonnardus, Texas, Monday, June 01, 2015, 19:38 (2151 days ago) @ slycrel

yes, but you can't see WHAT they are doing unless you click on them. I already know that they are playing destiny, b/c their emblem is showing, so don't repeat that fact in the mouse-over. Show what they are actually doing.

Avatar

Interesting article in Forbes about matchmaking

by stabbim @, Des Moines, IA, USA, Monday, June 01, 2015, 19:25 (2151 days ago) @ Schedonnardus

have the mouse-over show me what they are doing in destiny and X/Y players (2/3, 4/6, etc). Then if i want to see who all is in the party, or if i want to join them, then i can click on them.

Expanding on that idea: you know how the director will show an icon next to activities that one or more of your friends are currently in? I've always though that hovering over that activity should then pop up a list showing WHO precisely is playing it. It just seems like the obvious way to go, to me.

Agreed

by marmot 1333 @, Monday, June 01, 2015, 21:29 (2151 days ago) @ stabbim

- No text -

Avatar

Interesting article in Forbes about matchmaking

by Kermit @, Raleigh, NC, Monday, June 01, 2015, 18:53 (2151 days ago) @ CruelLEGACEY

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2015/06/01/if-bungie-built-destiny-around-groups...

Some interesting stuff in here. There's a quote from Deej addressing the many requests for in-game matchmaking for high-level activities:

"At current, our philosophy about endgame content is that part of the challenge includes forming up a team."

To which the article counters:

"If you’ve designed a game around group-based endgame activities, part of your challenge as a developer is figuring out how to get players together in case not everyone has five spare friends with the same console and unlimited free time lying around. It’s not the player’s responsibility to combat this glaring issue on your behalf."

Anyway, some good thoughts and good suggestions in here. I think we've all seen these suggestions before, but it's well presented.

I can't read the article right now but I strongly disagree with the premise that finding a team to tackle challenging activities should be push-button easy. No one thinks this way about any other team activities. You don't walk down to the park and expect two full basketball teams to be there waiting for you, minus a slot just for you. If you can't make the effort to find players, it's a good predictor of your effort once the game starts. The ease of finding players should be commensurate with the stakes. It's like the 20% down rule that used to exist for mortgages. It used to be that if you couldn't save 20% for a house downpayment, you couldn't buy a house because you not having the 20% was a strong predictor of your ability to afford a house payment. Sure, everyone wants a house, but if everyone gets one and they're not ready for it, it's a disaster (cf. 2008). My workmates complain about this all the time, but they never think about how bad the experience will be when people routinely quit after a wipe or two.

Avatar

Interesting article in Forbes about matchmaking

by CruelLEGACEY @, Toronto, Monday, June 01, 2015, 19:13 (2151 days ago) @ Kermit

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2015/06/01/if-bungie-built-destiny-around-groups...

Some interesting stuff in here. There's a quote from Deej addressing the many requests for in-game matchmaking for high-level activities:

"At current, our philosophy about endgame content is that part of the challenge includes forming up a team."

To which the article counters:

"If you’ve designed a game around group-based endgame activities, part of your challenge as a developer is figuring out how to get players together in case not everyone has five spare friends with the same console and unlimited free time lying around. It’s not the player’s responsibility to combat this glaring issue on your behalf."

Anyway, some good thoughts and good suggestions in here. I think we've all seen these suggestions before, but it's well presented.


I can't read the article right now but I strongly disagree with the premise that finding a team to tackle challenging activities should be push-button easy. No one thinks this way about any other team activities. You don't walk down to the park and expect two full basketball teams to be there waiting for you, minus a slot just for you. If you can't make the effort to find players, it's a good predictor of your effort once the game starts. The ease of finding players should be commensurate with the stakes. It's like the 20% down rule that used to exist for mortgages. It used to be that if you couldn't save 20% for a house downpayment, you couldn't buy a house because you not having the 20% was a strong predictor of your ability to afford a house payment. Sure, everyone wants a house, but if everyone gets one and they're not ready for it, it's a disaster (cf. 2008). My workmates complain about this all the time, but they never think about how bad the experience will be when people routinely quit after a wipe or two.

Totally agree. I've actually made that same basketball comparison myself (great minds ;p).

I do like some of the suggestions made in the article, however. Rather than a simple matchmaking feature, some form of designated meeting place for various activities, or the ability to broadcast your desire to join a group for a specific activity. Again, we've seen all these suggestions before. I just thought the article made some good points regarding Bungie's involvement (or lack of) on this side of things.

Avatar

By that logic, matchmaking shouldn't exist at all.

by CyberKN ⌂ @, Still has a line in the sand, Monday, June 01, 2015, 19:18 (2151 days ago) @ Kermit

Not that I think that raids should have matchmaking, but your basketball analogy falls flat because we already have that in Destiny in the form of the crucible. A more apt comparison would be putting together and successfully running a small business that requires multiple employees/business-partners.

Avatar

By that logic, matchmaking shouldn't exist at all.

by Kermit @, Raleigh, NC, Monday, June 01, 2015, 20:03 (2151 days ago) @ CyberKN

Not that I think that raids should have matchmaking, but your basketball analogy falls flat because we already have that in Destiny in the form of the crucible. A more apt comparison would be putting together and successfully running a small business that requires multiple employees/business-partners.

By what logic? Not mine. Crucible is a low-stake activity--a pick-up game. Matchmaking is perfectly fine for that. Other activities require a greater commitment of time and energy. An NBA game can't just happen on the fly. The more difficult the challenge, the higher the bar should be to find teammates because otherwise easily found teammates are easily abandoned. I think a lot of people aren't used to thinking this way when it comes to video games. I've tried to organize raids with real-life friends who are like, "Yeah, I might be on sometime tonight." Um, no. We have showtimes for movies and kick-off times for sporting events, and we do for this, too.

That's not to say I don't think there should be more communication options in the Tower. I've advocated for something like digital sandwich boards so you could see what people need help with. That would be cool in that it would be in-the-world and would require some manual effort.

Bottom line: if filling the roster is a button-click away, so is leaving games. Case in point, the weekly now. The other day I joined one, and there were more names on it than you could view--easily over a dozen. Someone had to deal with a ton of quitters.

Avatar

By that logic, matchmaking shouldn't exist at all.

by CyberKN ⌂ @, Still has a line in the sand, Monday, June 01, 2015, 20:21 (2151 days ago) @ Kermit


By what logic? Not mine.

*Sigh*

I can't read the article right now but I strongly disagree with the premise that finding a team to tackle challenging activities should be push-button easy. No one thinks this way about any other team activities.

Yes, they do. They EXPECT it. And they're ENTITLED to it. We pay $60 to have access to the game itself, then another $60 every year so we're allowed to play other people. Matchmaking is typically included, as it has with EVERY OTHER ONLINE BUNGIE GAME INCLUDING THIS ONE!

You don't walk down to the park and expect two full basketball teams to be there waiting for you, minus a slot just for you.

No. And you don't have to pay $60 for the right to shoot hoops, or pay the NBA $60 annually for the right to play with other people.

Your analogy is terrible. Bungie owes it's player-base a better way to connect.

Avatar

By that logic, matchmaking shouldn't exist at all.

by Kermit @, Raleigh, NC, Monday, June 01, 2015, 21:32 (2151 days ago) @ CyberKN
edited by Kermit, Monday, June 01, 2015, 22:15


By what logic? Not mine.


*Sigh*

I can't read the article right now but I strongly disagree with the premise that finding a team to tackle challenging activities should be push-button easy. No one thinks this way about any other team activities.


Yes, they do. They EXPECT it. And they're ENTITLED to it. We pay $60 to have access to the game itself, then another $60 every year so we're allowed to play other people. Matchmaking is typically included, as it has with EVERY OTHER ONLINE BUNGIE GAME INCLUDING THIS ONE!

You don't walk down to the park and expect two full basketball teams to be there waiting for you, minus a slot just for you.


No. And you don't have to pay $60 for the right to shoot hoops, or pay the NBA $60 annually for the right to play with other people.

Your analogy is terrible. Bungie owes it's player-base a better way to connect.

What's with the sighing and YELLING and hyperbole about my terrible analogy? I don't even know what we disagree about. You said you don't think there should be match-making for raids and Bungie should give us a better way to connect. I agree.

The higher-level activities go beyond what I think people expect from video games, and that's what I meant. By teams I meant organized sports, where the more commitment you give and relationships you build, the more rewarding and successful the activity becomes. I think Bungie made the right choice. People complain about the lack of matchmaking, but I think that would pale next to the complaints they'd get about the results of matchmaking for high-level activities.

Avatar

By that logic, matchmaking shouldn't exist at all.

by narcogen ⌂ @, Andover, Massachusetts, Wednesday, June 03, 2015, 23:14 (2149 days ago) @ CyberKN

Your analogy is terrible. Bungie owes it's player-base a better way to connect.

I've got a hockey bag in the closet with a few hundred dollars' worth of equipment in it.

Now who owes me 17 more skaters?

Avatar

By that logic, matchmaking shouldn't exist at all.

by CyberKN ⌂ @, Still has a line in the sand, Wednesday, June 03, 2015, 23:33 (2149 days ago) @ narcogen

Your analogy is terrible. Bungie owes it's player-base a better way to connect.


I've got a hockey bag in the closet with a few hundred dollars' worth of equipment in it.

Now who owes me 17 more skaters?

Where did you buy your license to play hockey? I would talk to those people.

In this case, I would equate the hockey equipment to a console and controller.

Avatar

Interesting article in Forbes about matchmaking

by MacGyver10 ⌂, Tennessee, Monday, June 01, 2015, 19:35 (2151 days ago) @ Kermit

I like the analogy overall, but let's say you wanted to play basketball, but the only place to play basketball was at a gym in town you had to pay membership to. You would expect to be able to play basketball with other gym members that might be there looking to play basketball, not that you have to get enough of your friends to pay for a membership then coordinate with them anytime you wanted to play some 3 on 3. You realistically should be able to play with any other gym members that just so happen to be at the court when you want to play.

Avatar

Interesting article in Forbes about matchmaking

by Kermit @, Raleigh, NC, Monday, June 01, 2015, 20:14 (2151 days ago) @ MacGyver10

I like the analogy overall, but let's say you wanted to play basketball, but the only place to play basketball was at a gym in town you had to pay membership to. You would expect to be able to play basketball with other gym members that might be there looking to play basketball, not that you have to get enough of your friends to pay for a membership then coordinate with them anytime you wanted to play some 3 on 3. You realistically should be able to play with any other gym members that just so happen to be at the court when you want to play.

And you can--Destiny is not without matchmaking (and there's the Tower [which I explain in the post above can be improved]). But if you want to play a five-on-five regulation game and get a trophy at the end, you don't just walk in whenever you want and expect that to be there waiting for you.

Organized sports is something people understand as requiring some organization. It's worth it, and gives the activity greater intensity and meaning. Somehow people don't translate that to a video game activity, but it's no different.

Avatar

Interesting article in Forbes about matchmaking

by slycrel ⌂, Monday, June 01, 2015, 19:22 (2151 days ago) @ CruelLEGACEY

It's pretty well financial. They could do in-game what the LFG tools do, but better. They don't. Why? Because 1- it can be a horrible experience, and 2- they get you to market their game to your friends so you can do the upper level content. If I hadn't been referred to DBO by DogCow 6 months ago, I would have stopped playing probably long since -- it's not nearly as much fun solo.

Avatar

Interesting article in Forbes about matchmaking

by CruelLEGACEY @, Toronto, Monday, June 01, 2015, 19:39 (2151 days ago) @ slycrel

It's pretty well financial. They could do in-game what the LFG tools do, but better. They don't. Why? Because 1- it can be a horrible experience, and 2- they get you to market their game to your friends so you can do the upper level content. If I hadn't been referred to DBO by DogCow 6 months ago, I would have stopped playing probably long since -- it's not nearly as much fun solo.

That's an interesting distinction: matchmaking finds other players for you, but the experience usually feels like you're still playing "alone". There are other people in the game with you, but you're usually not playing "together" the way you do with friends.

Avatar

That's MMO design 101...

by slycrel ⌂, Monday, June 01, 2015, 20:12 (2151 days ago) @ CruelLEGACEY

...if you're playing with friends you'll keep playing. That's a bigger hook than anything else. The best MMOs also facilitate making friends. This is a big reason why raids can be so darn fun.

Avatar

That's MMO design 101...

by Kermit @, Raleigh, NC, Monday, June 01, 2015, 20:17 (2151 days ago) @ slycrel

...if you're playing with friends you'll keep playing. That's a bigger hook than anything else. The best MMOs also facilitate making friends. This is a big reason why raids can be so darn fun.

Yep, and big reason why raids with randoms are often not.

Interesting article in Forbes about matchmaking

by Slothboy, Monday, June 01, 2015, 20:42 (2151 days ago) @ CruelLEGACEY

When I first started playing destiny I was incredibly annoyed by the lack of matchmaking in all activities. I wanted to do the Vault of Glass but I didn't have enough friends to do so. I was also intimidated by destinylfg. It was a scary prospect to message a stranger and get in their game.

When I finally started using destinylfg.com it changed my Destiny world. I'm having a ton of fun and surprisingly often the people I play with end up on my Friends list. Mics are usually on and it feels like I am playing with humans.

Now, let's contrast that to the matchmaking activities that DO exist in destiny. Jump into the weekly strike. Go ahead. I'll wait.

Sweet. Enjoy your 9 strange coins.

Did you talk to the other two players that you were paired up with? Joke around? Share strategies? Send a friend request?

I'm betting you didn't. I bet you cruised through the level with a couple other players that might as well have been NPCs. If you're like me you join the team chat with your volume on but your mic muted, just on the off chance that someone does speak for some reason. Match over, see you later.

So i get what the Forbes guy is frustrated with, because taking that step to tap into a different system to find players can be initially intimidating, but I think it works much better than straight matchmaking does. Personally I find that it works so well that I don't really care if Bungie puts dev time into a similar system.

If they did add something I would suggest a new social space, with proximity voice enabled, where people can form up into teams. That would be much better than folks spamming me with messages when I go to the tower. But as it is it isn't that hard to find a team and it creates a far more social experience than matchmaking.

Avatar

Interesting article in Forbes about matchmaking

by CyberKN ⌂ @, Still has a line in the sand, Monday, June 01, 2015, 20:47 (2151 days ago) @ Slothboy


If they did add something I would suggest a new social space, with proximity voice enabled, where people can form up into teams. That would be much better than folks spamming me with messages when I go to the tower. But as it is it isn't that hard to find a team and it creates a far more social experience than matchmaking.

Yeah, this is one of the things that really hurt Destiny's social experience in the long run; Proximity voice-chat should have been enabled by default in all activities, with an easily discover-able "mute" option.

I get why they made that decision, but after seeing its effects I disagree with it.

Avatar

LFG & having a coffee before the date.

by dogcow @, Hiding from Bob, in the vent core., Monday, June 01, 2015, 21:03 (2151 days ago) @ Slothboy

Now, let's contrast that to the matchmaking activities that DO exist in destiny. Jump into the weekly strike. Go ahead. I'll wait.

Sweet. Enjoy your 9 strange coins.

Did you talk to the other two players that you were paired up with? Joke around? Share strategies? Send a friend request?

If they did add something I would suggest a new social space, with proximity voice enabled, where people can form up into teams. That would be much better than folks spamming me with messages when I go to the tower. But as it is it isn't that hard to find a team and it creates a far more social experience than matchmaking.


The number of times I've talked to someone else on a matchmade fireteam is equal to the number of thumbs I have (and if you play with me you might believe that to be somewhere around 10). The number of times it was an enjoyable experience? Once. The unenjoyable time was out of desperation to try & eek out a win in IB, we didn't win. Add to that the fact that the guy had an abrasive personality & an impolite gamertag and I wish I had kept my mouth shut. I just did not enjoy coordinating with Mr. Male Anatomy (or whatever his name was).

So, I would welcome some sort of LFG system built into the game, but it needs to allow me the ability to "have coffee with" potential teammates before actually teaming up with them and finding out that I don't really want to be on a date... er fireteam with them all evening. Also, it has to take more than just pushing a button to be dropped into a matchmaking hopper. Nobody will want to talk if that's all it is, and voice comm is oh so very NECESSARY for a fun and successful raid.

LFG & having a coffee before the date.

by Slothboy, Monday, June 01, 2015, 21:23 (2151 days ago) @ dogcow

Oh yeah, I like that. A non-committal conversation to get a feel for the player before you form a fireteam. Although this may be detrimental to the efforts of the 14 and under crowd to form a party. :)

Avatar

LFG social area needs kiddie pool?

by dogcow @, Hiding from Bob, in the vent core., Monday, June 01, 2015, 21:42 (2151 days ago) @ Slothboy

Oh yeah, I like that. A non-committal conversation to get a feel for the player before you form a fireteam. Although this may be detrimental to the efforts of the 14 and under crowd to form a party. :)

It would definitely be detrimental to the younger crowd. Presently I feel a little bad for them. They're playing in a somewhat hostile to kid environment. I've heard stories of them getting kicked from LFG groups just because their voices have yet to mature. I've actually gamed with kids who better than me. I suspect that the "kid hostile game environment" is another problem that should be solved elsewhere which would hopefully mitigate the ageism (and other potential youth related problems).

Avatar

Read the article

by Kermit @, Raleigh, NC, Monday, June 01, 2015, 22:07 (2151 days ago) @ CruelLEGACEY

I like his ideas and think Bungie might very well implement something like that--his second idea is what I and others have suggested before, too. What I like about it is that teammates aren't a button press away. It's not matchmaking the usual sense. A little effort to gather teammates translates into commitment to the activity.

Lateral Thinking

by electricpirate @, Tuesday, June 02, 2015, 00:19 (2151 days ago) @ CruelLEGACEY

I think the issue is less about over-reliance on matchmaking and more on the lack of end game activities that can get by without it. Part of that is fundamental to the design of destiny; it's best mechanics and encounters are designed around multiple players. That's why I've kind of petered out for the end of the story, but I've been enjoying strikes/Crucible. Part of it is about the tunnel vision to focus the end game around those mechanics.

I think there are steps in the right direction, for example level 28 POE seems like a positive move, and the wolf packs do a good job of generating teamwork even with strangers.

My design sense tells me that it needs activities that aren't so binary in their success/ failure. Maybe tiered/scored strikes? That way you can have activities that req mastery but aren't so frustrating to fail at. Public events kind of do this, but they aren't endgame activities.

Avatar

Forbes is ruining the game.

by narcogen ⌂ @, Andover, Massachusetts, Wednesday, June 03, 2015, 23:25 (2149 days ago) @ CruelLEGACEY

I'm not sure why Forbes has now decided to start caring about videogames, but I have to admit nearly every article they write about it makes me want to pull out my hair.

"My opinion is that every mode in Destiny should at least have the option to pair random players together in the game, and I’ve talked about how once that functionality was introduced to the Weekly Heroic Strike, it completely changed the way I played. Once I was able to farm for Strange Coins effectively, I built up two alternate characters who could now complete the weekly challenge because of the insertion of matchmaking."

I'm so glad you can now play this social game with strangers, rather than not at all, instead of making some online friends. Your ability to solo the Weekly coincided with my necessary decision to stop playing the weekly except when I have a full fireteam, because playing with one random is an exercise in frustration more often than not (although I did have a good experience this week).

The compulsion of so many players to speedrun everything, running past not just patrol enemies but even enemies that are part of the mission but don't need to be killed in order to advance, is infuriating. It nearly always results in a wipe as the solo player rushes ahead into the darkness zone while the others are still behind actually playing the strike.

Two players at level who know each other and communicate are more than capable of taking on any Weekly Strike there is. But because of the incessant whining about needing matchmaking for everything and "at least make it an OPTION" we now can't do it without going through matchmaking.

That's another thing that drives me nuts-- this "make it an option" nonsense. It can't work that way. The whole point of matchmaking is that it's mandatory. The only way to get in the random singles like the Forbes writer is to force all the fireteams that aren't full to accept players. If we could opt out we would, and there would not be enough fireteam spots for every player (or journalist) with an empty friends list who wants coins.

So, thanks, Forbes.

Avatar

It's because Activision is publicly traded.

by iconicbanana, C2-H5-OH + NAD, Portland, OR, Thursday, June 04, 2015, 00:36 (2149 days ago) @ narcogen

- No text -

Back to the forum index
RSS Feed of thread