This game is just "who has the better item/perk" game
The person who usually has the best items/perks wins the game. Sorry.
DBD was supposed to be a survivor horror game who all should share the equal chances in surviving as much as the other and vice versa for the killers.
But with stupid Ultra Rare items and meta perks, the game simply turned into the "person with the most spendable BP wins" game and it's stupid to say the least.
- Red keys
- Red Maps
- Red Moris
- Iridescent ______
- Red add-ons
- etc
*Not to mention offerings that let's you keep all that.
How can anyone play a game solely based on one's skills when the entire match revolves so much around what items/perks you hold?
Tagged:
Trusted
Comments
I never said it guarantees a free win.
I said it guarantees a game that goes in your favor drastically to the point it makes some games easier than others.
Of course it makes the game easier, that's the entire point of having perks, items and add-ons. But none of them, with the exception of maybe a handful of ultra-rares, sway the balance so far in one direction that it notably affects the outcome of the match from the outset.
I don't know whether this analogy will mean anything to you or not, but it's like saying that League of Legends is just a game of "who can kill the most minions". Minions give gold, and gold buys items, and items make your champion stronger, so it's an important part of getting ahead early, but it's not even close to being what defines the outcome of most matches, let alone the game itself.
Yeah I get that analogy since I've been playing that game since 2013.
But LOL is completely different from DBD as that game has multiple heroes who have separate, totally unique skill sets with different roles to fulfill while DBD only has the same set of perks with the exact same objectives. No roles and no variety.
What makes ultra rare + best items/perks matter more in DBD than LOL is that since there are so few objectives to work on, these items literally carry players to either: finish objectives way earlier than intended, drastically increase survival OR provide easier blows, simply killing them all.
If DBD was as complex as LOL then I'll agree with that statement, but in reality? PPPffff, not a chance.
And you'll see why and how it affects the games since literally one every five posts about this game is "____ is OP. Get rid of it."
Yeah, "THE BEST" item.
Doesn't mean anyone who "HAS" it wins lol
Oh, and you forgot "usually" too :P
Entirely false statement.
OP, I know you are posting this in frustration, but what you're describing is not as grim as you think it is. Game sense and map knowledge have a lot more to do with your prospects than your build. Your build can definitely give you advantages, but you eventually reach a point where everyone is essentially on even footing, in that regard.
How much time do you have in the game? Is there anything specific that you're having a hard time with? What role are you playing, and what perks are you using? We can probably help you have a better time.
I mean, I respect your opinion, but I would appreciate a reason and so forth...
Completely untrue, really. I run survivor with one perk, and still escape the majority of the time.
I think DBD might be more complex than you're giving it credit for. Obviously we can't make a direct 1:1 comparison between the two, since there are always going to be differences to point out, but for the purposes of this argument, champions and their abilities in LoL are comparable to different loadout combinations in DBD. In both games, playing the meta, whether it's a particular champion or a particular set of perks, will tend to give the average player an advantage, but a good player can play whatever they like and still do well, because at the end of the day those things aren't what differentiate successful players from unsuccessful ones.
What both League and DBD have in common with each other, and with all competitive multiplayer games, is that it's not what you have that matters but how you use it. Knowing how the mechanics of the game work, and being able to predict your opponent, are what make a good player good, not how much gold or bloodpoints they have.
Okay, you asked me lots of questions so let me dissect your post to give you some intel on my part:
"[...]you eventually reach a point where everyone is essentially on even footing, in that regard."
Although I get what you are trying to say, but with items and perks that literally provides easier access to certain objectives, there is never going to be even footings, ever. That said, unless the entire team of survivors have the same quality of items as each other + the killer and so on, maybe. But using my logic and theory? It's VERY VERY VERY unlikely that smth like that will be remotely close to even. Especially in a game like DBD.
"How much time do you have in the game?"
148 hours/Rank 4 Surv/Rank 8~9 Killer
"Is there anything specific that you're having a hard time with?"
Nothing really, but the game becomes stale once people start using strong/somewhat OP items/perks/addons.
I have to run the same quality of items/builds in order to counter them and that's no fun at all.
"What role are you playing, and what perks are you using?"
I enjoy playing both but survs mostly and my perks depend on what I feel like doing. I try to stay away from the whole "this is meta" stuff cuz it ruins the fun as it already is.
Damn, making me feel inadequate with those ranks after that playtime!
How do you prefer to play as survivor, in terms of your focus and your perks? What specific things frustrate you, other than just red items and offerings?
Of course, that's true for all games regardless of what you play.
But in this case, DBD nor LoL matches people with ranks/skills on the other side of the scale.
i.e. you'll never play with a Bronze when you yourself is in fact a diamond+. Same with DBD.
There is a thing called MMR and with that in mind, we should think in a match where everyone has similar skill level.
In that situation, the whole item thing becomes more important/crucial than you suggest they'd be.
If you are on a battlefield, versing another soldier who has a similar level of capabilities/skills, the chances are that it'll be totally unfair if that person used a powerful weapon when let's say you are holding a pistol.
Like I state again, if we were on even playing ground with equal handicaps than fine, but in this case and most cases, it'll be biased once better items come in to the picture.
I'm pretty solid with my perks.
I don't play SWF, since that seems too unfair for the killer and I don't run DS nor DH simply because that stuff gets boring and literally adds fuel to the fire.
My most common perks are: Spine Chill, Borrowed time and Iron Will(!). The last slot usually changes depending on who I play. Smaller characters (usually female characters) I may run smth like quick & quiet and if necessary, I'll probably run Technician.
But regarding the frustration part is the whole toxic cycle that revolves around dominating one another.
I see frequent DCs happen on both sides when survivors or killers use really powerful items/addons especially the higher the ranks go up.
In some way, I find lower rank matches (especially after rank reset) to be more enjoyable than red ranks!
DCs, trolling, BMing happens WAY more often the higher you go and that sucks.
Of course, one player will have the advantage in that situation. That was never in dispute. The question was not whether the advantage exists, but whether it is so pronounced that it defines the outcome of the match in most cases.
If DBD really were so broken that having the best perks, items or add-ons usually guaranteed a win, then (a) no one who isn't a glutton for punishment would ever play anything but, and (b) the developers would have noticed that being reflected in the statistics and done something about it long ago. We can't know for certain without looking at the stats ourselves, but the fact that neither of those things is the case would strongly suggest that powerful loadouts are not as much of a deciding factor as you're claiming.
Blaming devs for stuff is the last resort I'd want to take since they are usually the scapegoat for everything. Therefore, I'm not going to comment anything about devs doing what.
People complained about smth for years and devs only recently did smth about it. That said, I think looking at devs for answers is pretty unreliable.
"the developers would have noticed that being reflected in the statistics and done something about it long ago."
Yes, true.
I believe (hypothetically), that if the best items/perks/addons were available for everyone in a much higher frequency, the stats would prove to be shown clearer. With that said, the low probability of someone using a powerful tool is simply due to the lack of abundance.
Coming back to my own analogy, if a war happens with pistols vs machine guns, sure if the soldiers are inexperienced and know nothing of guns then yes, regardless of what weapon they use, it'll all be useless.
But, once again I repeat, playing on the same even playing field, items will and are carrying players to have easier games. This means the more BP you spend/invest, the better experience you'll have in playing. I find that pretty revolting to be honest.
They can look at the stats for just games in which powerful perks and add-ons are used, and I'm sure that they have in the past. Also, problems being addressed long after people started complaining about them has far more to do with production time than it does with the devs being slow on the uptake, but that's a whole other discussion.
At this point, we're both just repeating ourselves. I think that powerful loadouts are not the deciding factor in most games of DBD, and that the available evidence seems to support that - you disagree, and neither of us seems likely to convince the other, so let's just leave it at that.
Hard agree there perks make a massive difference, especially if it's like an aemy of second chance perks of a big gen control build. It's one of the reasons the new player experience is such a trainwreck. The grind is so long you have to play a lot better than someone with actual perks to have a chance and that's just a thing you have to deal with on a the long term, it's hella stressful.
I disagree,but you are probably better off listening to some of these guys that have way more time on the game than me. But I have a few matches where I was yellow rank,running low level adept builds,and was still able to beat teams of higher rank with full meta builds. There's tons of instances where the people with the best perks and items aren't even good players. Some use them like a crutch. You still need to know when to use said items,how to loop,and maybe even have some luck. Also the argument changes depending on the item. Having a very rare key is different than a flashlight for example. Now if you are talking a coordinated team with meta and good items,yeah,I'd agree. But you could have the best stuff in the game,and it sure doesn't matter if you get hooked and no one comes to save you,lol. The good items are also pretty rare. You can't have them all the time