Thoughts on DBD - LONG POST

Renzun

Hi all,

Like many that have been voicing concerns as to recent changes I, too, have a few comments, concerns and criticisms that I care to voice about a game that we, as a community, care about.

To give a brief background: I'm a relatively new DBD player (having owned the game for around three months) that just hit the century-and-a-half marker in total hours played. Since joining the playerbase, I've reached rank 4 as a survivor and rank 6 as a killer. To me, this is the best hunter-killer title I've played although my experience in the genre is limited to EVOLVE. In general, I've spent thousands upon thousands of hours on other games and have tried (unsuccessfully) to create a career in streaming games due to my highly competitive nature. All of this has led me to today where I feel strongly towards the games that I choose to play. If I don't like a game, I don't hesitate to drop it. Obviously, with 150 hours in three months, DBD is a game I continue to enjoy playing and wish to see it grow.

This said, let's dive into the 'meat and potatoes' of my concerns.

After reading the most recent patch notes, I have concerns as to the bias of the writer for bEHAVIOUR. Frankly, it was obvious in reading that there was a certain 'pro-survivor' stance to the writing which was further enforced when looking at the gameplay changes being pushed to the PTR. Although I respect a company for their choices in how they choose to handle dev / player relations, it irked me so much I made an account to post to the forums. I claim allegiance to neither killer or survivor, I enjoy both equally although some days I'm inclined to play one role more than the other. My issue with the notes wasn't that it was focused on addressing the frustrating issues of one side but, as developers, I would expect you to have impartial bias towards both roles. It is your game after all.

Let it be known, I'm not here to b*tch about my issues with changes to The Doctor, Gatekeeper, and H:Ruin. Instead, I want to focus on the overall state of the game.

First, in the most simple terms I can write, DBD is a game of time economy. That's it. As survivors, you have to spend a certain allotment of time to complete generators to escape. As a killer, you have to stall and prevent this. This defines the killer / survivor relationship with survivors having the initiative as to how the killer must respond to their actions. Thus, the killer is the reactive (i.e. defensive) role. This relationship causes a few problems as it, paired with the idea that this game revolves around 'time economy', defines how the game is played. Welcome to DBD.

EXPERIENCE AS KILLER

Starting my experience just after rank reset, my first month was a learning process. After a dozen successful and unsuccessful games, I had come to know the mechanics fairly well as they were simple to pick up. What makes the game more interesting, and frustrating, were the perks and items that augmented and changed the ebb and flow of the game. Playing primarily The Trapper, it was fun to see the incremental results of leveling up perks and feeling like a killer that was getting stronger and more adept at the game. I think it was at about rank 10 - 8 that I hit my first stall. At these ranks, survivors we becoming less scared of my hand-welded axe and more confident in their abilities to waste my precious time looping me. Again and again, I would find myself in a shortage of time as I would lose games in less time than I could safely pick up all my traps. So, in turn, my playstyle adapted. Not a fan of the paywall and timewall, issues I'll touch on later, I waited for 'higher tier perks' to become available in the Shrine of Secrets. My 'fun' builds weren't viable anymore. Running around with the combo [Distressing] and [Unnerving Presence] was fun but, they were quickly replaced with [Pop Goes the Weasel] and [Sloppy Butcher] to buy me more time over the course of a game. The same can be said for addons, as my rank increased, the awareness of my opponents did as well. To this day, if I don't have a 'bag' and a 'color darkening' addon equipped I feel weaker which, as a killer, is a terrible sensation.

During the Holidays, my friends bought me a few expansions so that I could try new killers. And, let me tell you, I was super excited to play them. How naive I was going against my medium ranked survivors with one or two perks. I was shown no mercy and lost all of my games handily, deranking multiple times. I've stopped playing those killers as the time I would need to invest to get them to the level of my higher level Killers isn't worth it when every game is a ranked match; another criticism I will touch on later.

Because I'm talking about my Killer experience, I ought to touch on H:Ruin. I don't own The Hag. I have never played a game with it equipped. But, I have gone against it and had it be the cause of many, MANY lost games. And yet, I feel like its a necessary tool for many killers to feel, for the lack of a better word, 'killery'. I've won games as survivor where H:Ruin was in effect the entire match. I've also played games where H:Ruin lasted less than twenty seconds, effectively making the Killer enter the game with three perks. Neither of these potential situations, in my opinion, is healthy for the state of the game and I've been through both. There are healthy, alternative solutions to the problem that is H:Ruin, but I'm inclined to disagree with how it being handled currently. Removing, unarguably, the best staple killer perk in lieu of something weaker isn't the solution to the problem it presents.

EXPERIENCE AS SURVIVOR

In my second month of playing, I focused my efforts on learning survivor. It took time to learn the nuances of mechanics as they were completely different from the Killer. This came as no surprise, merely an exercise of time that I knew I had to put in to learn something new. After some time, 'good' skill checks became 'great', my looping got (and still is) better, and my perk loadout became more refined. Again, I found myself not willing to put in the time on certain characters that represent the 'meta build' that is prevalent in any game. Level 35, 40, and 45 is a lot of games (and time) and, frankly, I would rather put the BP's (Blood Points) into characters that I enjoy playing.

I found climbing the ranks in survivor much easier than I did as a killer. A good chase, a generator completion, an unhook, and a heal seems to me to be the recipe for, at least, a black pip. Doing more than that, I found myself climbing much faster (much thanks to my experience on killer) than I could keep up with perks, items, and addons. I don't have a better word for describing the ladder experience other than 'easier' relative to my time on killer. I felt like I was putting in less effort and being rewarded twice over for it.

My main survivor, Quentin, was chosen solely for the lore of his story. To this day, he is my highest ranked survivor (see: Quentin prestige level:1). In hindsight, this was a poor choice as I don't use a single one of his base kit perks. Nor do I use them on any other survivor in the game. I find this to be pathetic. I've tried to make his kit work but he doesn't have anything special to bring to the table when you play solo (which, trying to prove my individual skill is what I did). Other than [Pharmacy], to which I would rather start the game with a medkit, I found that [Vigil], which over the course of a game was reducing my [Sprint Burst] cooldown by eight seconds per use, and [Wake Up!] weren't strong enough to warrant using in my games. In fact, when other survivors saw my loadout, they would often criticize me in the post game chat for 'not playing like like the rank I was'. Resigned to not wanting to be left behind, I swapped my loadout to a more 'meta' influenced build with perks like [Decisive Strike] and [We'll Make It].

In my first month as a Quentin main, I hit purple ranks. The following month I reached rank 4 (red rank).

OVERALL THOUGHTS

There is a lot to be unpacked from the tales of my experiences above. I hope to do this in a way that both provokes conversation and spotlights the issues that I feel have been ignored by bEHAVIOUR.

Front and center is the 'ranked only' system in place currently. Initially I like the fact that the game was 'competitive only'. This was when the perks and addons represented a similar playerbase that I deserved to engage with. Over time this changed drastically, more when I wanted to level up other survivors / killers to swap up my playstyle. The fix here is simple: enable a 'casual' mode alongside 'ranked'. Not allowing survivors to see other players ranks isn't a solution to the 'ranked only' mode. In my opinion, this only highlights the difference in skill level that I experience when I invite my friends to join me for a round of DBD. Because there is only a 'ranked mode' most *balanced* games are played very seriously with little room for fun, on either end, to win. On the other hand, some games are a complete joke, insulting all competitive play because some players have the 'I’m here to have fun and screw around' mentality, ruining the game for a number of other players.

Second up is a mechanic that needs to be reworked in every aspect: the Hatch. On paper, this is a great idea. An alternate escape route in the face of death can create an exhilarating experience. In recent memory, I had a game where I brought a key to Mount Ormund Resort. I was playing Quentin and was duo'd with a friend. We quickly fell behind against a Spirit (prenerf) with H:Ruin and things were looking bleak being on my final hook. Finishing just enough gens for hatch to spawn, I started scouting the map while my friend was on a gen and The Spirit was chasing the only other survivor alive. Running desperately (i.e. randomly) I saw the outline of the hatch off in the distance and made a beeline towards it... and the other injured survivor / Spirit. I made it to the hatch, opened it with less than five meters between me and the chase going on, allowing me and Kate to escape by a hairsbreadth. This, in turn, condemned my friend to die (note: he didn't die, the Spirit let him escape). But, in this case we, the survivors, didn't do anything near enough to deserve to escape, let alone be rewarded for how we did it. Another game I won't forget came early on in the first month of learning The Trapper. Due to the lack of ruin and running the [Overwhelming Presence] + [Distressing] combo I alluded to earlier, I lost all five gens before sacrificing a single survivor. Luckily, I the two doors had spawned very close together on Crotus Prenn Asylum. So, I setup the usual minefield of traps on prime locations, locking down both exits and all of their choke points. I was set to take on all four and started my patrol with confidence. After a few minutes of nothing, no scratch marks, no outlines, literally nothing, I started to become paranoid. No sooner than the thought of an unopened hatch came into my mind when all four of them escaped with two keys scrounged from my unguarded chests. I've never felt more cheated in losing a game in my life. These experiences shared, the Hatch needs a desperate rework. I don't think that it needs to be entirely removed from the game like I've seen suggested. Instead, I believe that it should be used less like a 'get out of jail free card' and more of a 'means of last resort'. Instead of rewarding players for escaping through the randomly generated item, allow it to be an alternate, but semi-punishing escape by giving them less blood points than they would get if they were to escape naturally. Even more, don't punish the Killer for having someone get away. The number of black pips I've received because of my ultra defensive playstyle because a single person escaped by means of the hatch is aggravating! Why should I lose a game, that statistically I've won, because a person escaped by means of something I can't control (while playing a zone-control killer nonetheless).

Third, the paywall and timewall. As a brief explanation and paywall is block on certain items (in this case perks) caused by the developers to force the player to invest time or money to overcome. Iridescent Shards are the currency I'm talking about here, the Shrine of Secrets is the market. Although I enjoy the random weekly return to the game to see if I can try to unlock a new perk, the variance is a bit ridiculous. I would love to see a base set of perks that are always available in the Shrine of Secrets alongside the weekly random ones. Top tier perks shouldn't have to be waited on for weeks and, although money supports the game, it would be more player friendly if everyone had access to certain perks like [Decisive Strike], [Barbecue and Chili], [Head On], and / or [Hex: Ruin]. I purposely listed perks that are unobtainable without a lot of work and commitment of time but I hope you understand what I mean in the general sense. The other wall, the timewall, is another problem for casual and non-casual players alike. Leveling a character to 35 to get their teachable perks is a time consuming task. Let alone level 40 and 45 for their next, respective perks. On top of that, then having to put effort into claiming more BP's to put levels into the characters that you want those teachable perks on. Do you see what I'm getting at? Most of my friends that I've gotten into this game don't care to make that effort and are choosing their survivors based on the best base perks available to them. That, to me, steers people away from fun and drives them to optimization.

Fourth, the skill variance. Let's be completely honest here, there is a high level of skill variance in this game but, on the whole, as ranks increase so does average skill level. Yet, there is nothing done (in terms of the overall gameplay mechanics) to compensate for this increase. This leads to 'the meta', that horrible, overused, and stale word driving who and what is viable in DBD. Surprisingly, I've come to realize that many people don't understand the concept of what makes certain killers stronger / weaker than others. I want to touch on that here. In this game, time economy is everything. How efficiently survivors utilize their, or waste the killers, time defines the entirety of the game. This proves why, for survivors, time enhancement effects (toolboxes, medkits, example perks like [Dead Hard] or [Prove Thy Self]) are so strong when utilized efficiently. On the other hand, Killers, need time nullifying (examples: [Hex:Ruin], [Corrupt Intervention], and [Pop Goes the Weasel]) and movement enhancement effects (examples: Wraith's [Windstorm] Addons, 'Billies' [Chainsaw], Nurses' [Blink] and Spirits' [Phase] to be strong in the 'meta'. Both sides, Killer and Survivor, have arguments as to what feels oppressive to play against. Sadly, both sides aren't wrong. In fact, both sides have claims that, ultimately, balance each other's out. But, let me define the real issue at hand: four versus one. Assuming the same level of growth between players, the killer is constantly fighting an uphill battle to maintain defensive dominance on the map because they have to face four players at once. Simple, yeah? The difference between playing four yellow ranks and four red ranks is remarkable. I know, I've been in both situations. Thus, I feel a system ought to be put into place to augment the entire game relative to the rank of the survivors. The first example that came to me was: increasing the time it takes to complete a generator by 'x' seconds depending on the overall rank of the team. As a crude example, per color rank, add 8 seconds to the completion time of each gen. So a gen that would take 80~ seconds to complete at yellow ranks takes 120~ seconds at red ranks. If the players are better, they ought to be up to the challenge. And perhaps my rough example is too extreme but, regardless, I feel as though something should be done to compensate Killers for playing against a group of better players.

Fifth, the maps. My god, the maps. I love the maps, they are so nice to look at and imagine being immersed in. And yet, I want to quit every time I land myself as The Trapper in Red Forest. I know I'm going to spend the first few minutes trying to shepherd survivors into one half of the map in hopes to setup my zone defense. If that fails, I've literally lost the game. And that's my mindset as I'm looking at Evan MacMillan in third person before the match begins. On the flipside, on the same map, I would be excited as The Pig because if a head trap activates on a survivor they, at best, get to two different Jigsaw boxes before they pop. Talk about variance in killer strength because of where they spawned. And perhaps I see it all wrong and I need to adopt a new playstyle to my Trapper but, as it stands now, map variance is a bit too high for my liking. Personally, I would prefer more variance in loops and jungle gyms to having ever expanding maps.

Sixth, the post-game emblems. Again, as The Trapper, I play a ultra-defensive playstyle that focuses on zone control. The usual start to one of my games (and remember, I don't have access to H:Ruin) is going down 2 gens within the first minute. With 3 gens left, I start to setup my minefield of traps in a defensible area while the survivors hunt for gens three and four. With two, or usually one, gens left, the game really begins. But, by this time, I've already lost when it comes to the category of [Gatekeeping]. In the games that I'm allowed to setup my zone, I have a decently high four-kill percentage that I'm proud of. But, if I don't maintain that four-kill, (i.e. hatch escape or, worse, disconnect) I'm guaranteed to black pip at best. Not going to lie, sometime it sucks to 'win' a game because, according to the report card at the end of it, I really 'lost'. FeelsBadMan. So what if I want to run [Insidious] and camp right next to the hook? Isn't that a viable killer strategy? No, not if you want to rank up. Because sitting around a tactical position is bad. Don't get me wrong, DBD is a game and, thus, meant to be enjoyed. But everyone enjoys the game for different reasons and having a ranking system that punishes players for not following the 'dev approved meta' sucks. IT SUCKS. Period. After writing this paragraph I feel, more than ever, that casual games ought to be implemented. It would have spared me the time of writing this entire paragraph and many, many other paragraphs in other posts.

Seventh, and finally (as I'm getting quite tired, this has gone on longer than I anticipated) updates, hotfixes, and changes. We, as a community, get that no game is perfect. In fact, the flaws of a game have a direct link to how people receive and view that game. Small bugs are acceptable. Gamebreaking ones aren't. I'm confident to say, hopefully with many others, I would rather see you take your time to develop a polished update rather than a hastily patched one to pump out new content. And, personally, I would love to see more frequent, smaller changes made to the game. Using DOTA 2 (Valve (specifically Ice Frog)) as an example, I respect the constant stream of changes they induce to bring the game back into balance. I also like how, every year, they throw the biggest curveball into the mass of the game to shake everything up. Although I don't know if there are details that prevent this from occurring, I feel like it would be a welcome change to the current methods currently employed.

Thank you for your time in reading these 5+ pages of writing, I have a lot of passion in this game and I hope it shows in my effort.

Warm regards,

Renzun