How ARC Raiders Is Advancing Player Experience Through Behavioral Matchmaking and Feedback Loops

Since its launch on October 30, 2025, ARC Raiders has been a standout success in the extraction shooter genre. Priced at around €40, it delivers AAA quality at a competitive price point. According to GamesRadar+¹, it’s been Steam’s top-selling premium game every week since release. Even more impressive, Forbes² reported that by December 2025, ARC Raiders retained 91% of its player base, while Battlefield 6, an established franchise, lost 85% of its players after launching just two weeks earlier. For Embark’s second IP, that’s extraordinary.

But what fascinates me most isn’t just the numbers. It’s the design decisions behind player experience. As a player with nearly 100 hours logged on Steam and as a professional user researcher, I naturally look for patterns. And ARC Raiders offers a compelling case study in how behavioral data and feedback loops can shape matchmaking.

Pattern 1: Matchmaking Based on Player Behavior

Players speculated early on that ARC Raiders uses behavioral matchmaking, and Embark’s CEO recently confirmed it.

Here’s what that means: the game observes your in-game actions and adjusts your matchmaking accordingly. If you shoot other players, even when they ask you not to, you’re flagged as aggressive and matched with similarly combative players. Prefer a peaceful approach? Act like a decent human being and you’ll join a community of looters focused on battling the real enemy: the ARCs.

In a recent interview³, Embark CEO Patrick Söderlund explained that matchmaking now works on three layers: player skill, team size (solo, duo, trio) and player behavior (PvP vs. PvE tendencies). He confirmed that this aggression-based layer was introduced recently and is still experimental:

“Since a week ago or so, we introduced a system where we also matchmake based on how prone you are to PvP or PvE. So if your preference is to do PvE and have less conflict with players, you’ll get more matched up [with those players].”³

Söderlund stressed this is “not a full science” and will continue to evolve. The goal is clear: reduce unwanted conflict and create player-aligned experiences. This validation makes Pattern 1 a strong example of behavior-informed design in action.

Pattern 2: Feedback as a Dynamic Input (My Observation)

Now, this second pattern is based on my personal experience as a player and what I’ve seen discussed on the ARC Raiders subreddit. It’s not officially confirmed by Embark.

Here’s what I’ve observed: ARC Raiders includes a simple, optional in-game survey after each session. It uses a Likert scale for quick responses, and if you select the most negative option, you’re prompted to elaborate. Why does this matter? Because if you’re unhappy with your match, say, you ended up with aggressive players despite preferring PvE, you can specify that in the survey. The game then appears to adjust your matchmaking, and by your third session, it may even prompt you to re-answer the survey to fine-tune your experience.

If this observation is accurate, it suggests that ARC Raiders isn’t just tracking behavior. It’s actively listening to player feedback and integrating it into the experience. That’s a rare and powerful design choice.

Why This Matters for UX

From a user research perspective, this is a textbook example of closing the feedback loop. Embark didn’t just release a game and run it on autopilot but is building a system that adapts to players in real time. It’s a simple yet brilliant solution because it addresses a decades-old player request: “Listen to us.” And it demonstrates the value of player-centric design for long-term engagement.

I have worked now for six in the industry and academically spend eight years dissecting games and game productions. And one pitfall I experience sadly way too frequently is having researchers but not listening to them. Having access to player feedback but deliberately ignoring it.

Hence, as a researcher and ARC player, these patterns make me happy because they reinforce a core principle: data alone isn’t enough but listening and acting on feedback is what creates meaningful experiences.

References:
1. Game Radar+: Arc Raiders has been Steam’s top-selling premium game every week since its launch, so it’s no wonder its player count has barely dwindled | GamesRadar+

2. Forbes: ‘ARC Raiders’ Has Kept 91% Of Its Playerbase, ‘Battlefield 6’ Has Lost 85%

3. Interview: (1083) GamesBeat’s Dean Takahashi talks to Patrick Söderlund of Embark and Owen Mahoney in ARC Raiders – YouTube