Josh M

[Josh M @JoshM_93]

@hutchinson Damn, you just can’t but help but keep dying and dying and dying and dying on this hill, huh?

Maybe because you’re one of the people being protected by extreme SBMM?

[Josh M @JoshM_93]

@hutchinson I know. I’m saying those potential quitters also aren’t the bulk of their consumers that you mentioned. They’re making shitloads of money with or without them. My point is they don’t have to choose between doing things right by the most hardcore players OR making tons of $$$.

[Josh M @JoshM_93]

@hutchinson Neither are the most fickle casuals who’d quit playing without the strict SBMM to save them. It’s not like this system is keeping the whole franchise afloat. Remove it completely and I’m sure the vast majority stick around, both the most hardcore players and the more casual ones.

[Josh M @JoshM_93]

@hutchinson If that’s true then it’s a shame that retention of the worst casual players who would happily quit playing CoD if things were at all difficult for them is their main concern.

[Josh M @JoshM_93]

@hutchinson True but instead of deciding to screw over one group to placate the other, leave it up to chance. Forget the SBMM and make it based on connection so every game is a random mixed bag of players.

Sometimes you demolish, sometimes you get demolished. That's the only fair way.

[Josh M @JoshM_93]

@hutchinson I dont see how they can even prove its due to SBMM when there's a new game every year. Its not like theres a constant game, with adjusted SBMM strictness, and then we can see the resulting change in players.

Maybe "WZ = more retention". Or just "better game = more retention".

[Josh M @JoshM_93]

@hutchinson @baybucs @DrDisrespect @hitchariide Player retention didn’t seem to be a problem for more than a decade while CoD rapidly grew to become one of the biggest franchises of all time BEFORE they added this overly-strict SBMM.