This isn't an issue with other multiplayer games as they either offer these as an option a player can enable in the way I suggested or have the behavior built into the base matchmaking algorithm. In other games, you have to select your input device before a match starts and can't just switch while in the match like you can in Destiny. Though, other games don't use p2p networking ported from a 2008 game and instead use a client-server model with regional, dedicated hosting. That would be more expensive and require more time to implement than allowing players to opt-in for a longer queue, but to get a better match. They wouldn't even have to create separate pools. During matchmaking, the player's preference could be factored in and if there is a lobby with an open slot and the rest of the lobby meets the optional requirements of the player, that player could be added, otherwise the backend would check the next candidate. If the queue for the player takes longer than a minute or so, they could be prompted to suspend the options for the current queue to get a faster match. Bungie could monitor and trend the data on how these sorts of options are being used and the impact they have, then use that to improve matching too. Between the lack of regional matchmaking (I should never be matched against people in the EU or Pacific countries if I am in US East, for a competitive activity as the laws of known physics define the latency over distance) and the extra lag that exists from crossplay, PvP doesn't feel great. It was tolerable back when we had the regions with Battle.Net (Americas and Europe), but latency became a problem when they migrated to Steam and took those options away. When crossplay was introduced, it got even worse. I've made other threads here and on Reddit suggesting to improve this already. Since that is a much larger target, I am focusing on smaller problems that don't require infrastructure overhauls.