Seeing our own MMR Rating
Is there any reason we cannot be allowed to see our own MMR rating?
Not talking about anyone else, literally just our own. People would like to see where they're playing at and who their best killers are.
Comments
-
Players would lose games on purpose to tank their MMR and go against new players.
Some do this already but giving them an actual number they can record incentives it.
5 -
They already do that, I don't see how seeing the number changes any of that at all. They know they're dropping it, whether that's by 10 or 100 points is irrelevant.
8 -
I agree. No harm in letting you see your own number. If anything, it would be incentive for bragging rights. Some would argue that would create more try-hards, but who cares? Gamers love stats and there is no solid reason for keeping MMR ratings hidden.
10 -
It would bring elitism and more toxic behavior than there is now. Players with higher MMR would talk trash or even greif players with lower MMR.
4 -
It's not showing us other peoples ratings so it would not do that.
6 -
It still would because someone with high MMR plays with someone not at thier "skill" level and notices that to them how they plays shows thier lower than them so they start griefing them and then harass them after the match.
0 -
Everyone would screenshot their own and tweet it within seconds, come on fam you know this.
3 -
It's fairly common practice for it to be hidden in games that utilize it. Although I"d like to see it, I get why they don't show it. Beyond the community considerations, a hidden MMR also gives cover when it comes to matchmaking. The reality of "high MMR" is hilarious. More specifically, it doesn't really exist. And I don't think the devs are inclined to show MMR and reveal the illusion for what it is. It's all placebo.
9 -
What does them screen shotting their own and showing it have anything to do with being toxic? People show off their rankings like that in literally every game.
Honestly if that is too much and going to cause toxicity then we are literally trying to live in a little safe bubble these days and afraid to touch grass.
3 -
Well while some other games don't show MMR, they do show the "ranking" correlating with that MMR. We have neither here.
I do agree though that not showing our own really has no reason other than to keep how flawed the MMR is from being shown.
2 -
Aside from any toxicity concerns, imaginary or not, there's the "I'm at so-so MMR and I only play with so-so and I'll show you if needed" baloney that would ensue, leading to lobby dodging and thereby matchmaking shenanigans.
You know how the devs feel and resist things smelling like rankings and numbers and the like. Keeping it casual, not wanting to hurt queue times. Etc
2 -
Not seeing MMR is hurting more than helping at the moment.
6 -
""I'm at so-so MMR and I only play with so-so and I'll show you if needed" baloney that would ensue"
That's literally every game in existence rofl. This is trying to avoid basic online game interaction.
"leading to lobby dodging and thereby matchmaking shenanigans."
It does not lead to this because it's only your MMR you're seeing, not people in the lobby.
"You know how the devs feel and resist things smelling like rankings and numbers and the like. Keeping it casual, not wanting to hurt queue times. Etc"
It's the weirdest thing that almost no other game goes this far to try and avoid. I disagree about it increasing queue times whatsoever.
2 -
Probably the only thing we've ever agreed on.
5 -
How so? Would you play differently knowing your mmr was 1400 vs 1900? If you could see it, would you ask others to provide it?
1 -
I have literally nothing to play for in a game that uses a competitive ranking system.
Yes, I'd play differently. Yes, I'd ask other people, I'd like to know how bad the matchmaker actually is.
4 -
There's just not really any reason for it, beyond satisfying idle curiosity. Most games don't show you the inner workings of their matchmaking system, I'm pretty sure- the only time you'd see a comparable number would be in like, the competitive queue for a game that has a ranked mode, but you don't see your MMR for the quick play modes in those games (again, that I know of) so it's a little moot there.
It wouldn't really achieve anything, and there'd be some edge cases were people use it to get mad or be toxic, so I don't really think it'd be worth the effort it'd take to implement it personally.
4 -
Sounds like a personal issue, which is fine, I'm not faulting you on that. But my question centered on the "its hurting more than helping" aspect. Which to me is "not knowing is hurting the game than helping".
2 -
The game has every flaw of using a competitive matchmaker whilst providing none of the benefits.
No rankings, no Killer specific rankings and nothing to compare yourself to.
However, we do get sweaty games and a split between people who want to play competitively and people who don't.
3 -
I would wager that the number 1 and 2 reason for why they don't let you see your MMR is. People on the forums would discredit your feedback based on your MMR. People would take that information to determine how good they are at the game.
They don't want you discouraging people to give feedback on the forums. They don't want your own belief of your skill at the game to stop you from posting on the forums. They don't want you feeling bad for not being good at the game.
3 -
Just explaining what their reasoning is. I neither agree or disagree with it.
MMR can be used to bully. Idc who I versus or if my MMR is low or high.
1 -
Prior Rank Based matchmaking was visible and we saw what came of that. Players would make it to Rank 1 and grow big egos. Then you had those that intentionally kept low ranks to bully the casuals and make YT montages.
The current system does have some of the same aspects, but without visual confirmation it cuts back on the narcissism. Nobody takes a person saying "High MMR" seriously.
I don't see the current system as a competitive one. It's more of a way to separate new and experienced players. A true competitive system would punished the skilled, at least in this game. If you ever rushed to rank 1 after a reset (rank based) you should know what that entails.
1 -
But as I said, we wouldn't know their MMR, only our own, so that wouldn't really apply.
0 -
The last one showed you other peoples rank, seeing only your own MMR does not do that, completely different.
The equivalent to this would be like playing League except you can never see what grade you were in (bronze, silver, gold ect) which just sounds completely silly, you'd just be guessing "well I think I'm plat" rofl. Except in League not only do you see your own, but they even show others as well, not an issue their at all. Most games do that as well. However here I'm not even asking for that, just to see your own.
1 -
You literally just described the exact system we currently have right now, not the system I proposed.
The scenario you just described is not changed at all by knowing your own MMR. You said they thought they seemed not at their skill level, what does that have to do with knowing your own MMR? Nothing. You just thought they seemed way worse than you.
By this criteria you would think we need to hide names in lobby as well even from the survivors as they could think that persons not their skill level.
1 -
Only real difference between the old rank based and new "skill" based is that one doesn't reset.
Are we trying to say DBD is equivalent to LoL? Would you say Plat in League is the same as High MMR in DBD? I doupt they are comparable because High MMR doesn't mean skillful.
It doesn't matter what your MMR is because there are unskillful ways in achieving it. Camp the basement for 4k or 12 hook. In the end they are the same. Unless the score actually reflects skill, there is no point in knowing it.
2 -
It definitely does not cut back on the narcissism. Now, we can't even say definitively what skill bracket we even are.
The game uses a hidden number based off your previous performance to match you against players of a similar skill level. That's literally a competitive matchmaker.
1 -
"Only real difference between the old rank based and new "skill" based is that one doesn't reset."
And that one we could actually see what our own "ranking" was, which is the entire point of what we're talking about.
"Are we trying to say DBD is equivalent to LoL? Would you say Plat in League is the same as High MMR in DBD? I doupt they are comparable because High MMR doesn't mean skillful."
Literally just comparable in having a rank system in which you can see your own rank, don't try to stretch "comparable" past the point I'm making. I wouldn't say "plat" is equivalent to high MMR in DBD as you're missing my entire point, the point is not whether you think the game is good at measuring balance with the MMR system, the point is that you can see where you're at, if you're improving and who your better killers are.
You are getting stuck in the conversation of whether MMR actually measures skill and that's not the conversation we're even having or is it relevant to the point I'm making. I agree MMR is very, very, very flawed in measuring skill but just like the old system we had, which was also very flawed, it still had "some" measure of skill as on average an old rank 1 would still play better than a lower rank player even if you did get lots of bad rank 1 players. On average it did show something.
"It doesn't matter what your MMR is because there are unskillful ways in achieving it. Camp the basement for 4k or 12 hook. In the end they are the same. Unless the score actually reflects skill, there is no point in knowing it."
You're confusing a system as showing literally "nothing" because it is very flawed. A system can be very, very flawed at showing skill and still simultaneously be representative of "some" skill. Even though we both agree MMR is bad at representing skill are you seriously going to tell me that you think a low mmr game and a high mmr game are "ON AVERAGE" going to look the same? Let's be real here.
2 -
But that's the DbD community's interpretation of skill being used, which I've always took issue with. At some point you'd think it would dawn on people that decision-making is a skill, and it's more valuable in DbD than players realize. Like...people don't stop to wonder why so many comp survivors aren't the best loopers in the world. Because it's not the most valuable skill for a survivor to have at a high level.
3 -
That would just let observant folks work out in great detail how terrible the matchmaking currently is, so BHVR will never implement it, claiming it's a bullying issue. Which it is not.
4 -
Elitism.
0 -
And that one we could actually see what our own "ranking" was, which is the entire point of what we're talking about.
And what did that do for us in a positive sense? Sure, the 1st time you reach it you feel like you accomplished something. But after it was a formality.
Because the rank didn't mean anything. It was how you played and many rank 1s played poorly.
Even though we both agree MMR is bad at representing skill are you seriously going to tell me that you think a low mmr game and a high mmr game are "ON AVERAGE" going to look the same? Let's be real here.
The two extremes will look different. A better example would be mid‐MMR and high MMR. Whatever that truly means.
1 -
You’re right, and I’ll take it one step further: many matches are lost because survivors who think they are good try and fail to loop. The reality is that all you need to do is hold forward and predrop pallets. This is even easier now that you can tell gen status/progress.
0 -
Bingo. That's one of the ways that showing it would hurt the game.
1 -
"And what did that do for us in a positive sense? Sure, the 1st time you reach it you feel like you accomplished something. But after it was a formality."
That's actually not an equal comparison as before rank 1 was the end, but you would not realistically be able to reach the MMR cap so you would not have that same experience of "reaching rank 1 and done".
"Because the rank didn't mean anything. It was how you played and many rank 1s played poorly."
To say it didn't mean "anything" is objectively false. Skewed? Yes. Nothing? No.
Just because many people at old rank 1 played poorly didn't change the fact that on average they played much better than lower ranks. Saying it didn't mean anything is a gross exaggeration.
"The two extremes will look different. A better example would be mid‐MMR and high MMR. Whatever that truly means."
Well first even if that was an extreme example difference, that is still you admitting that it does mean "something". So to say it means nothing you even agree is wrong.
Let's even take your example of mid mmr to high mmr. You think those will look the same? Anyone that plays in the higher mmr brackets can tell you they will not on average look the same. Can you get bad players in high just like mid? Sure, does that disprove the point? No, it doesn't. That would be like saying I know people who smoked their whole lives but were unaffected by cancer, that doesn't disprove that on average smoking is a leading cause of lung cancer.
There's always exceptions to generalities, but exceptions don't disprove the generalities.
0 -
This exactly. There is absolutely no other reason to not show ratings besides how it would reveal how terrible the matchmaker is. All other reasons given are nonsense.
Showing ratings would actually humble a bunch of people who claim they are at high MMR when they are not, which is a good thing IMO.
2 -
A new player is worse than a vet. Yeah, you made your point.
Sounds to me you are looking for a goal. A finish line of sorts. Something that validates your investment in the game. Problem is, the MMR score is poor measuring stick. Best it can do for you is validate you're not a new player.
1 -
Is a poor measuring stick bettering then having no stick at all? The majority of players would say yes.
People naturally want to see some form of visual representation of their improvement in games, we currently have none.
1 -
I'd say no. We don't need more elitism, toxicity and to feel like Dbd requires more and more time. A video game is healthier without it.
1 -
We already have elitism and toxicity. The difference is that a lot of it comes from mid/low MMR players who claim to be high MMR. Revealing rating and deflating some people's egos may actually reduce toxicity coming from the faux-elites.
1 -
I disagree based on my experiences with WoW arenas from a few years ago. More meta slaving, less fun and the 2200s can't contribute because the 2400's think they're trash, the 2000s shouldn't have an opinion because the 2200s think they're trash, and the 1800s shouldn't speak since they're obviously trash even though their rating was better than 80% of the playerbase involved in arenas.
Forget that noise, if you play DbD you have the right to an opinion and all players should be considered by the devs.
0 -
You have the right to an opinion but the value of your opinion on things like game balance definitely should be at least loosely related to your skill level.
Anyway, DBD doesn't necessarily need to show the rating of your opponents/teammates (at least until after the match, if at all).
1 -
But we do have that right now in the form of anonymous mode made to protect streamers from possible hackers harassment but now players assume of they are on Anonymous Mode they have to be hacking or will greif during the match.
As many said knowing your own MMR would cause huge egos....people would post thier MMR on the forums to "validate" thier arguments and anyone who has low MMR or refuses to share thier MMR would be ignor d by said person because of their own ego. Heck you can see that right now with people who say "I'm high MMR...." And then will ignore many peoples thoughts and opinions because of said assumptions.
1 -
You're looking to try and protect people in an online video game from other peoples egos...like really, that's where we're at now? You're wanting us all covered in bubble wrap.
People posting their own MMR's on the forums is irrelevant as other people could literally just lie about their MMR and no one could disprove it so that isn't a point.
2 -
So the forum rules could be amended to prohibit posting one's own rating except in discussions where it's explicitly about matchmaking/MMR.
1 -
Very loosely as balancing exclusively for the top is a great way to kill any game that's not an esport. It doesn't matter if it shows your opponent's MMR for discouraging discussion because the second it becomes possible to screenshot your MMR and post it on a forum it will be used to discourage discussion.
Edit: Even if you prohibit it on this forum someone will do a third party website and link to there. Also, this isn't the only forum
1 -
Personally I'd rather we not be able to see it, this community has shown it would only use the info to abuse and belittle others.
2 -
"It might be abused in discussions" is not a good reason not to let players know how they rank or how piss-poor of a job matchmaking does.
You also say that like the discussions here really impact development in any meaningful way; there's very little direct feedback that the devs appear to use when making decisions about the game. It's mostly just the community (myself included) collectively pissing in the wind.
1 -
We can agree to disagree then. Having it be used abusively in discussions is, in my opinion, 100% a reason to not release it. If someone wants to see a DbD rating go up nothing is stopping them from joining the DbD competitive scene. There's nothing for the general playerbase to gain by releasing it but there is something to lose.
BHVR can't even release the most perfunctory statistical information without a follow-up ban wave due to the community's reaction. It's not worth it to release MMR numbers.
1 -
That already happens.
3
