mmmhmm. yeah, I understand some of these words.
Can anyone explain to someone who doesn’t play ranked?
Get beaten badly by a team.
Play again.
New team is you plus members of team that recently easily beat you.
Now they are not good.
Ranked usually uses metals and gemstones to identify the skill level of the player. Bronze, silver, gold, usually diamond, etc.
So basically he “got slapped” meaning totally hot his ass beaten in the game by these high level players, but when they ended up in his team on the next round they played like total noobs.
This is me whenever someone asks me to stay in their team.
Suddenly all the apparent skill I displayed last game is revealed to have been an illusion
Game 1 - Gets an ace, completely dominates tactically, on top of every call
Game 2 - How do you shoot, again?classic
There was this guy in our friends group who was your guarantee of losing if he was on your team. You could pair him up with the best players and still his utter lack of game-comprehension would somehow drag the others down to his level.
Ans I hope he was thr happiest one in the group, ignorance is bliss.
This person is usually a complex combination of mean and stupid, blaming everyone else for being trash while they make the worst, most incompetent plays you’ve ever seen.
Source?
It’s me. I’m that idiot. Or…used to be.
can’t relate tbh
Weird, I wonder what the common factor could be?
Look I don’t appreciate you coming at me with these logical and reasonable points.
It’s because games like Call of duty rig matchmaking so you don’t win / lose all the time. Connection preference can make all the difference
Edit: I appear to have stumbled into a rocket league focused discussion
There are very few games from large companies that don’t tilt favor one way or another. Generally speaking though there is usually some way around this and much more skilled players will do better, but joe schmoe after an awesome game will always end up on the shitter team one way or another next game.
Well, I never have this problem… because I stopped playing competitive games. I suck and they actually kinda stress me out unless I play with friends who are chill.
Likewise, coop is so much more fun IMO
Especially if it’s something like Overcooked
Silly coop games with a low barrier of entry are amazing
I stopped playing Dota 2 in 2019, clocked 6500 hours on that game. The only times I had fun was when I player with friends, solo queue was torture.
deleted by creator
One thing that helped me get better is the mindset that if I can’t carry, I don’t deserve to rank up. I just adapt to whatever I’m given.
If I carry my team can’t be good.
That’s how I feel all the time too. 😎
Why are you carrying? You should be working with your team instead of plowing through on your own.
If your strength is offense and you get paired with offense people as well, someone needs to fall back and cover defense. If you’re not doing that once in a while, you’re the liability.
Hence, adapt to whatever I’m given. If I can’t play offense and defense, I don’t deserve to rank up.
You adapt to what your team needs. If you think you are “carrying” you’re playing a team game completely wrong mate. Simple as that.
They are all ranked the same since they have the same skill level in the end.
Wait… Are you telling me that actual cooperative teamwork is more important than some rank/stats/status symbol? Tryhards hate this trick!
opinion time:
the truth is players don’t lose all the time. companies setup the matches to deliver a 50/50 win loss ratio, because if they didn’t do this, then some players would be losing all the time, these players would uninstall, and then they lose money because they can’t sell boxes or whatever they push these days.
however, humans also experience losses worse than wins. the magnitude of a loss emotion is typically greater than an equivalent win emotion. we evolved like this to make sure you didn’t lose your stash of food in the tree somewhere, or perhaps at the back of the cave - if you did, you died, and so those humans who preserved a sense of dread when experiencing loss were more likely to pass on their genetics. this is why playerbases constantly whinge and moan about being on the losing team - you are actually getting 50/50 win/loss, but your brain only pays attention to the losses, it doesn’t remember the wins as well, and so your perception is distorted.
only in some rare brains is this emotion spread dampened - these rare humans are able to tank losses easily. it still feels bad for them, but they can take the hit way easier. these individuals are typically also the professionals in competitive ventures of all strokes. since society sees them as “elite”, this is now seen as a good thing, even though in rougher times, you can’t expect these people to give more than a cursory fuck about the food supply being lost to bears. it’s one of the reasons why you see elite athletes constantly developing drug problems, catching rape charges, and going bankrupt. the loss just isn’t as emotionally bad for them. they can tank it. it’s not psychopathic, it’s just… they have less aversion to losses.
anyway, if a game is equal, balanced and fair, then an overwhelming majority of the playerbase is experiencing more loss emotion than win emotion, on average. this undercurrent of loss emotion is the true cause of the “violent” part of “violent video games”. it’s not the shooting itself, it’s the competition between players that festers these loss emotions, that then causes the aggression.
boomer legislators get this part mixed up and confused all the time, and so they speak reductively of the problem when they demand less bloodsplatter and gun imagery. what they don’t get, is FIFA, Super Smash Bros, Rocket League etc, can also cause this horrible feeling, because they are competitive games. it’s the competition that does it, not the violence. this is the true origin of toxicity in playerbases. no wonder DotA2 players always have 4000+ hours and say “i hate it, but lets go again”. “just 1 more round” it sounds like drugs, doesn’t it? “just 1 more bump brooo”. “cmonnn, just 1 more”.
solution: stop playing competitive matchmaking. it’s not good for you, it’s not healthy. you are feeding your brain a virtual drug. you are chasing the win, just like a gambler. stop feeding your ego, you don’t need to be good at a game to feel valid. overwhelming chances are you don’t have a “winner-style” competitive brain that will help you cope with loss emotions and truly let you enjoy comp/ranked games, so please stop trying. you’re hurting yourself. “top” rank will never be worth your mental health. you have to let it go.❤️
sources: (loss emotion magnitude in dota2, pdf)[https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7348&context=etd].
(elite athletes found to be arrested far more frequently for DV and SA than non-athletes)[https://commons.emich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1483&context=honors]
(competitive games, not the “cosmetically violent” games, lead to aggression)[https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2011/08/video-games]
and lastly, my own personal experience dealing with this in 2018. most of this post is anecdotal, it’s an opinion piece, and i don’t care to back this up further.
incredibly insightful post. thanks a lot for sharing. i never thought about this in that much detail, but it really seems to make sense what you are referencing to.
It’s not some conspiracy, if you are at a 50/50 win rate, that means you are at the appropriate skill level. If you’re better you would have more wins and you’ll move up the ranking until you start losing more games, where you will fall down the rankings to where your average is.
It’s skill based ranking after all, some people have good days where they are better and some also have bad days. It all averages out, but 50/50 win rate means you are appropriately ranked.
It’s very easy to think how striving for 50/50 in all cases is a good and even desirable solution, but that’s not how matchmaking is built in modern games because it would make for pretty bad experiences
That is how they are built, and how does everyone having as even of a chance as possible make for a bad experience?
Putting a bias like the parent comment is claiming is what will make the experience bad. Yeah you’ll get grumpy that you get paired with someone who has no defence, but they are also paired with you for a reason, they are a liability in other places.
I find the people that complain it’s a bad experience are the ones that are the most sore about a loss, they are the ones that just want to steam roll everyone so they can have fun while causing others peoples experiences to be diminished so they can be the ones having fun. Don’t be this person.
Ah. Well, I’ve made several and seen more in my career.
They don’t aim for 50/50. Apart from normal elo systems, some things we work with is streaks, ping, class or roles, team width and other things that I probably should not mention.
The goal is to drive engagement, not 50/50 win rates. You just have no idea what you’re talking about. But that’s okay, just don’t use such sure language when you haven’t worked with matchmaking systems.
Which ones have you made? I’m guessing they are ones that crashed and burned, or you’re making it up. The post is dead no one is seeing your lies but me. So save it lmfao. The fact that you claim it’s multiple is even more damning, it means that they aren’t working and you need to pump another out. Maybe if you only claimed to have worked on a single one they lie would be slightly more believable……
They are setup to be 50/50, you lying about stuff doesn’t change that. And if you are biasing you match making, maybe, just maybe that’s why your games are crashing and burning…….
You are wrong
Very embarrassing and probably why you will never make games is your choice to be close minded
Ah yes, very thought out rebuttal….
Again, no one else is seeing this BS but me, so just save the obvious lies for someone gullible mate.
I still haven’t read that source about dota 2 but personally, I think it’s addictive because it feels sooooo good when you win. It brings the worst of you when you lose, but when you win, it feels really good, it’s so satisfying to win a hard match, competitive or not (i play a lot of turbo, feels addictive anyway). After all, if we only felt bad when losing and didn’t feel as good when wining, we wouldn’t come back. Or at least, I wouldn’t. If another game frustrates me, and gives me nothing in return, I leave it
Honestly I don’t even think it’s being elite. Ranked or not, the main concept is understanding 2 things, 1. There is no real consequence to loosing and 2. That looses are nothing more than something you can still have fun in, it’s not the destination but the journey that matters.
As someone that had losses and events in my life, the game and most things in life and miniscule, ans with this I enjoy everything. It’s great. No need to worry cause there is ALWAYS better evenings ans you have had worse, much worse than loosing 25+ in a row. Elite or not, it just means being logical and not judging your self
Agreed. I was huge on League for the better half of my 20s and it was all consuming. Haven’t been into any multi-player since. (not knocking people who do, to be clear. Just didn’t want to go down that rabbit hole again)
Yea I know some people like that. I’m fortunate enough that I don’t get addicted like that, I play plenty but not to the detriment of my life.
TBF, it was also my social life for better or worse, we’d same room all day. I could probably play something with less obsession now but I’m in my late 30s anyway I don’t need to waste my day losing to teenagers with functional reflex times 😂
This is a great writeup and matches with my experiences as well. That said, I would say that the discourse around the subject is complicated and itself fraught with emotion. Ironically (or perhaps just appropriately), the discourse is framed as competitive: one between “boomers” and “gamers,” with the prevailing narrative being that out of touch pearl clutchers are obsessed with attacking forms of entertainment they don’t understand instead of dealing with the real problems of society. Part of the narrative, however, is also the categorical rejection from gamers that video games have the ability to affect your mental state or influence your emotions in ANY capacity. Which, as you’ve noted, they do. It’s competition. We see professional athletes get into fights and engage in poor sportsmanship constantly. In baseball, pitchers will throw balls at batters with the intent to hit. Batters will charge the mound. And this is in a game that explicitly forbids violence.
I think part of the issue is this expectation (and you noted this, as well) that people attach their identity to being “good at video games” - it’s a signifier of accomplishment for people who haven’t really accomplished much. Often times, this is young people or people whose careers are just getting started, or who are still in school and have a tenuous degree of personal agency. The thing that’s tilting, the thing that makes them upset, is that they expect this to be a domain in which they have power and control, and loss is a signifier of the fact that this is not true. It reminds them they don’t really have any power over their own lives.
But I need my angry loss emotions, I don’t have the capacity to deal with any real emotions.
deleted by creator
Rock and stone brother
If you Rock & Stone, you’re never alone!
Is that a real game?
deleted by creator
It’s a…different(?)… type of multiplayer game.
D-FENS changing lanes.
White male gamers have delusions of adequacy.
I always get the opposite:
- playing ranked matches in Rocket League
- watch your mates hand off the ball to the opponents all game
- lose 8-1 & requeue
- same jokers now on other side
- sick mechanics & flawless play
- lose 8-1 & rage quit
You don’t think it’s me, do you? 😂
What a save
Trash
I Got it
There are two kinds of gamers. Rage gamers and anxiety gamers.
So the game devs weren’t too far off with the “boss kicks your ass” … “Boss joins team and is as effective as a wet napkin.” Looks like it’s actually a real thing! Lol
