Who's the most liked character?
It's Dwight, right?
Who do you think the most liked character in DBD is? I see a lot of Dwights.. but what are your experiences?
My personal favorites are Quentin, Dwight, Jake, Steve, Yui, Feng, Steve, Kate, Nancy- Legion, Myers, Trapper, Deathslinger, Pig, Huntress and Trapper- my top from each side being Quentin and Legion :0.
Tagged:
Dev
Comments
The most well liked killer is either Pig or Myers. Everybody seems to love them.
For survivors it would be Dwight easily. Just look at that face. How can you dislike that cutie? It’s impossible.
For some reason people tend to play as Meg and Claudette the most though.
Agree, the noise she makes when stunned is enough to make anyone go "OINK!"
I love all the weird posts on here I'm laughing really hard reading through these
No, it's not okay to drug people, but if you had a boss who mentally (and sometimes physically) abused you, you'd probably want to get revenge, or at least see them get karma! No, it's not okay- but they deserved it quite honestly. Dwight is a stinky turd for doing it, but in the end I'd forgive him, especially since he was a potato to not realize what he was doing..
Pig's power doesn't encourage tunnelling at all although a lot seem to focus on already trapped survivors for reasons mere mortals can never understand
Piggies want to see you perish. That's why they follow you around.. to see your beautiful dwight head explode ;)
Well yes I might've harassed a few survivors when I can tell from the beeping they don't have long left and I don't want them to get to a box. I usually focus on the untrapped ones though.
You seem to be under the impression that the law is never right. It's actually right quite often. Sometimes the law gets it wrong, but those are rare cases. This would not be one of those cases. Intent to cause harm or not, what Dwight did was completely dickish. You don't go around putting stuff in people's food, law or not, that is a complete dick thing to do. He could have killed the guy, and if he did intentions wouldn't save him. The only thing that would do is lessen the punishment. If you drive a car drunk and kill someone, you didn't intend to harm anyone, but you were reckless, still broke the law, and therefore you will get punished. You are still in the wrong no matter how you want to justify it. "But I can't afford a taxi" ... "but it's the company car and it was a long drive home, I can't just leave it there"... doesn't matter. You are still wrong.
I really don't get why you want to defend his actions so much. He is 100% in the wrong. Intention means nothing here, he put something in someone's food purposely to get some kind of revenge on them. That is a dickish thing to do, AND it is breaking the law.
"Imagine putting someone in a jail cell just because they spoke out of turn in a court room."
Because that disrupts due process. The courts don't want to put you in a jail cell for courtroom outbursts, but what other recourse do they have? Everyone has the right to due process. Despite what you think, the justice system works majority of the time, and the reason for that is due process. In countries without due process, there are FAR MORE people put in jail for crimes they didn't commit. Because they lack the right of due process, the judge can just kind of do whatever they want with them.
Imagine you are in court for a crime you didn't commit, and the person's mother gets up and screams "HE DID IT HE IS GUILTY GIVE HIM THE CHAIR!!!" And the judge goes "you know what she is right, chair it is!" *slams gavel* That's basically what you are asking for here.
"I do deny it. 100%. Whether you agree or not is your choice. But making a mistake and unintentionally causing harm does not make someone a dick. Period."
So you're saying that putting something in someone's food, not ACTUALLY knowing what it was, for the sole purpose of getting revenge on said person is not being a dick? Those are some massive hoops to jump through to reach that conclusion. You use the words "mistake" and "unintentional harm" as a way to justify his actions, but that doesn't actually change anything. He is still liable for his mistakes, and whether he intended harm or not, he caused it (especially because the guy beat up someone).
He. Was. A. Dick. End of story. It doesn't matter if he thought the drug was harmless, doing that is a dick move. I guarantee if someone put ex-lax in your food and made you ######### yourself at work, you would call them a dick. "Well I did it because you got my friend fired." You'd still call them a dick. And you would still file an assault charge. I guarantee it.