Editing Openai/694c9120-5ddc-8005-b705-bf72b68e5904 (section)

=== Assistant: Here’s the real situation w/ Arc Raiders and why the “friendly vs killer matchmaking theory” you saw in that Facebook p… ===
Here’s the real situation w/ ''Arc Raiders'' and why the “friendly vs killer matchmaking theory” you saw in that Facebook post doesn’t hold up as a simple truth — plus what the data actually suggests from community tests and official comments:

===== Embark Studios’ art director has publicly said Arc Raiders’ matchmaking “is quite complex” and does analyze player behavior as part of how matches are formed. That does point toward behavior being one of several inputs — not a simple “friendly = gentle lobby; killer = hostile lobby” rule. PC Gamer<ref>{{cite web|title=PC Gamer|url=https://www.pcgamer.com/games/third-person-shooter/your-bloodlust-does-have-consequences-in-arc-raiders-as-a-dev-confirms-we-do-analyse-behaviour-and-match-accordingly/|publisher=PC Gamer|access-date=2025-12-26}}</ref> =====

But crucially:
* They haven’t fully explained exactly what data they use, or how strong this behavior component is in matchmaking. Steam Community<ref>{{cite web|title=Steam Community|url=https://steamcommunity.com/app/1808500/discussions/0/841740171465606254/|publisher=Steam Community|access-date=2025-12-26}}</ref>
* That means real-world experience still varies widely — especially depending on game mode (solo vs squad etc.) and time of day. Facebook<ref>{{cite web|title=Facebook|url=https://www.facebook.com/groups/aussiearcraiders/posts/1119266350027010/|publisher=facebook.com|access-date=2025-12-26}}</ref>
* There’s no official system that guarantees you’ll be grouped with only “friendly” or only “hostile” players based on past actions.

So yes, behavior is tracked and factored into matchmaking logic — but not like some deterministic karma filter where simply having played one way locks you into a specific social bucket forever.

===== A content creator did test matchmaking by alternating aggressive vs non-aggressive play on separate accounts, and reported patterns where the “friendly” account saw more chill interactions while the “aggressive” one saw more hostile lobbies. GamesRadar+<ref>{{cite web|title=GamesRadar+|url=https://www.gamesradar.com/games/third-person-shooter/arc-raiders-tester-found-that-pve-players-get-put-in-friendlier-lobbies-while-pvp-ones-are-sectioned-to-aggressive-matches-by-using-two-accounts/|publisher=gamesradar.com|access-date=2025-12-26}}</ref> =====

But there’s a big caveat:
* Those are controlled observations, not a verified explanation of the algorithm.
* Players themselves in forums are split — some think matchmaking uses aggression data, others say it’s situational or influenced by other factors like gear stats or playtime. Reddit<ref>{{cite web|title=Reddit|url=https://www.reddit.com/r/ArcRaiders/comments/1peq3o3/there_is_matchmaking_in_this_game_based_on_player/|publisher=reddit.com|access-date=2025-12-26}}</ref>

In other words, community tests are interesting evidence but not confirmation of a strict “friendly or killer sandbox sorting.”

===== Your argument about pacifist groups still complaining makes sense when you look at how matchmaking actually works in modern multiplayer games: =====
* Most matchmaking systems (including ones that consider behavior) don’t fully override other major factors like: - Network/latency and region - Skill or progression metrics - Group size / game mode preferences - Pure randomness to fill queues quickly
* Even if behavior wholeheartedly influenced lobbies, those criteria are only part of the formula — they can’t 100% override all other matchmaking requirements. (This is supported by research on how matchmaking algorithms balance multiple signals like skill and behavior simultaneously.) ResearchGate<ref>{{cite web|title=ResearchGate|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/366465710_Improving_performance_in_collaborative_games_through_personality-based_matchmaking|publisher=researchgate.net|access-date=2025-12-26}}</ref>

So a player who rarely engages in PvP could still end up in a match with aggressive players simply because matchmaking has to fill lobbies quickly and can’t cherry-pick every time.

===== A lot of players say “I only meet friendly players in solo” — but that’s often due to queue structure, time of day, or simply solo lobbies attracting casual players who aren’t hunting fights — not because the game rewarded them for being calm. Facebook<ref>{{cite web|title=Facebook|url=https://www.facebook.com/groups/aussiearcraiders/posts/1119266350027010/|publisher=facebook.com|access-date=2025-12-26}}</ref> =====

See the difference:

✔ Social perception (“everyone nice in my lobby”)
✘ Algorithmic matchmaking based purely on past kindness / hostility

The former happens a lot. The latter is much less proven.

===== Is the Facebook claim strictly true? =====
❌ No — the idea that the game consistently sorts ''only'' friendly players into friendlier lobbies and killers into killer lobbies as a hard rule is *not an established fact**.

Is behavior ''used'' in matchmaking?
✔ Yes — devs have confirmed behavior analysis is a part of the matchmaking process, but not a simple “always put friendlies together” switch. PC Gamer<ref>{{cite web|title=PC Gamer|url=https://www.pcgamer.com/games/third-person-shooter/your-bloodlust-does-have-consequences-in-arc-raiders-as-a-dev-confirms-we-do-analyse-behaviour-and-match-accordingly/|publisher=PC Gamer|access-date=2025-12-26}}</ref>

Why pacifist complaints still happen?
🎮 Because matchmaking balances many factors, not just behavior — which means friendly players still sometimes end up with aggressive ones.

If you want, I can break down what other modern games use for matchmaking (skill, behavior, latency) so you can compare Arc Raiders to the broader industry patterns.