In what could be termed a rather unorthodox revelation from the EA writer, very interesting bits of information came forth concerning the Battlefield 6 matchmaking question, and the reactions could be said to be mixed. Indeed, the company assured that the matchmaking system will first look at the ping in order to prioritize the player’s location, server availability, and then this crazy kicker of “some” skill factor. So, SBMM started making its way in, yes, with people torn between bridging for it and kind of disrespecting it in a very bad way.
According to the tweet in question, the weighting of these factors would change depending on the game mode and player count. Hence, skill matching may be given much more weighting in smaller sizes, such as Squad Deathmatch, while bigger battles will be more about connection and server stability. But this is the thing–Battlefield players are not shy about expressing their opinions, and the replies? Ooh, lovely.
Some like @DucksandMemes basically said that it sounded a lot like what EA tried to implement in Battlefield 2042. According to him, it is not full-blown SBMM like Call of Duty. On the other side, @marcusmark2019 insulted the anti-SBMM crowd by calling them “woke cry baby no skill basement dwelling hackers.” Is it harsh? Yes, but absolutely fun.
For many veterans, however, the real battle lies in the absence of a server browser. Numerous tweets in response include all-caps demands such as @g_infr’s, “WE NEED SERVER BROWSER PLEASE,” and @Chimpaco’s, simply stating, “No server browser / hard pass,” emphasize how much an army values this feature. Some went as far as declaring the game “dead” without it, which… really hits hard.
Whose side is that in the SBMM debate? @Talo_Hex said that skill-based matchmaking might be fine for small game modes but large-scale battles would work better without it, while @Z6ne_Rider shot back in class, “If you’re scared of skill factor maybe battlefield isn’t for you.” Then @98_tigers screeched about SBMM killing the social aspects of an FPS and turning it into a “sweat fest.”
Come on, some are skeptical. Said @FrostCroftManor, “Hmmmm that sounds absolutely insane but it’s EA. I’m hesitant.” Fair. EA doesn’t exactly have a spotless track record here.
So, what does that leave us in for? EA is fighting to find a balance between competitive fairness and the freedom of play, but the Battlefield community is… ah, let me use the word; passionate about the way they want their matches to be played. Could this system work? Perhaps. Could this system satisfy anyone? Absolutely not. At least the whole thing has generated some good discussion while we await more concrete information.
But one thing is sure; if EA messes this up, the backlash will be louder than a grenade in a dead silence.
