Left 4 Dead is not assymetrical horror. And all of the games you mention other than Left 4 Dead failed and therefore do not pose any competitive risk to DBD
When you're playing against a team of survivors and you're the one in control of the zombies, yes it is.
But those games failing have nothing to do with DBD/BHVR. The devs of DBD did not make those games fail. They are not forcing us, the playerbase, to play DBD.
There are other options out there. DBD has thrived while others have failed largely due in part to a GROWING COMMUNITY and fun gameplay. Regardless how you feel and what you fail to understand, DBD has a rabid fanbase that continues to grow and thrive with the game.
Again, I don't really think you know what the term monopoly means.
I have to disagree. Back when F13 was hot, DBD was in a much worse state. SO much has been improved since then. Yeah it could be better, but I think you're being overly harsh for dramatic effect.
That you can determine if a game is better at originality, or more original it's objective.
What if it's financial success is due to a better monetization strategy or better overall resources or more questionable goal grinding features but the game is lacking effort in every other department? Have you never experience something like this happening in the industry?
Is the Indie side of the industry worse than their AAA competitors? Do you find your metric coherent in a financial comparison between those?
Search the history for Battleforge or Dawngate.
EDIT: Also, i never implied that player preference is not related to popularity or financial success. What i'm implying is that financial success is not going to determine if a game is better than another due to lacking every other single objective factor that is involved in game design.
As you said if player preferences or tastes are subjective why should we take them into account in an objective comparison?
That you can determine if a game is better at originality, or more original it's objective.
What if it's financial success is due to a better monetization strategy or better overall resources or more questionable goal grinding features but the game is lacking effort in every other department? Have you never experience something like this happening in the industry?
Is the Indie side of the industry worse than their AAA competitors? Do you find your metric coherent in a financial comparison between those?
Search the history for Battleforge or Dawngate.
EDIT: Also, i never implied that player preference is not related to popularity or financial success. What i'm implying is that financial success is not going to determine if a game is better than another due to lacking every other single objective factor that is involved in game design.
As you said if player preferences or tastes are subjective why should we take them into account in an objective comparison?
I never asked for an objective comparison, that was you who pulled "originality" out of thin air when I was asking how we could determine which game most players prefer. And you did imply player preference is unrelated to popularity and financial success, that was literally why you (and others) were mocking my statement to that effect.
What other metric would you use, then? I prefer to use things like player count (which correlates to financial success in a pay-to-play game) to determine whether people like to play a game because it seems objective. If people like it, they will continue to play it. If they don't, they won't.
You asked me for a "metric" which if the response you expected was not objective makes no sense...
Also player preferences can share objectiveness, as with Originality in my case, It depends on criteria and context.
Where did i imply that player preference is unrelated to popularity or financial success?
I was interested in baiting to discuss why someone would assume that financial success is traslated to a better game. If i wanted to mock you i would never have developed any argumentation after my first comment.
There have been quite a few other attempts at this specific style of survival horror games, which have been mentioned within this thread. Even now, "Phasmophobia" is gaining a steady following, with plans on adding the option to be the ghost in future (there's no plan for console scheduled). So it's not accurate to say it has a monopoly as it is not the only seller in this market.
It has a very successful business model, and despite the various complaints it received, it has devised and expanded on an idea - perhaps inspired by Left 4 Dead's showing that asymmetrical horror works - and developed its own place. Even if like-for-like, Identity V proves it's not a monopoly.
There will be more and more challengers in future. But they would need to come up with something original.
@MandyTalk that's a bold statement claiming Friday the 13th died and didn't last as long as you. They just recently had an update to the game. I can log on there any day and guaranteed be in a lobby quicker than dead by daylight. I enjoy both games thoroughly but that's just simply a bold claim on your behalf.
@MandyTalk that's a bold statement claiming Friday the 13th died and didn't last as long as you. They just recently had an update to the game. I can log on there any day and guaranteed be in a lobby quicker than dead by daylight. I enjoy both games thoroughly but that's just simply a bold claim on your behalf.
You can literally just check the Steam player count for yourself and see that it dropped precipitously after launch.
@Orion that's cool but, on xbox yet again I can guaranteed find a lobby quicker than dbd any day of the week, any time of the day. It's not a dead game by any means.
@Orion that's cool but, on xbox yet again I can guaranteed find a lobby quicker than dbd any day of the week, any time of the day. It's not a dead game by any means.
Depends on your definition of "dead", I suppose. I can find some older games that still have a small playerbase (myself included), but I consider those to be dead regardless, because a few hundred players (and decreasing) is not an active game by any means.
Depends on your definition of "dead", I suppose. I can find some older games that still have a small playerbase (myself included), but I consider those to be dead regardless, because a few hundred players (and decreasing) is not an active game by any means.
You know, I thoroughly enjoy both games. I started playing DBD and F13 in August of 2017. However, from that August to June of 2018, F13 had most of my attention, while DBD was just a fun game on the side I would play here and there. It wasn't until the lawsuit that I started playing DBD 'full time' and essentially dropped F13.
But as you mentioned, even before the lawsuit, F13 had a significant less amount of players daily, and I never understood that. When soley comparing the Counselors and Survivors (Not Jason vs Killers) I never understood how someone could find Survivor more enjoyable then Counselor. The reason F13 had so much more of my attention was because of how fun the objectives were. Sitting on a static objective for 80 seconds (or 400 for all 5) while occasionally pressing spacebar is not fun, nor is it engaging or challenging. At least with counselor you would have to search for your objective pieces, and install them, all while defending yourself and your teammates from Jason. Not to mention the game had more ways to escape and the counselors were unique. Which offered very varied ways to approach certain objectives. As opposed to the bland Survivors of DBD. Yes perks exist, but F13 had perks on top of Counselors being unique as well. It also made the objectives in F13 pretty challenging if you were using a Counselor with low Repair stats. And as we all know, the main objective of DBD isn't challenging at all, and that makes it no fun in my opinion. Not to mention it was a lot more satisfying watching the gruesome kills in F13 then it is watching the Entity kill a hooked person, or even watching the Mori's, which feature little to no gore at all.
My point being, the objectives in F13 were actually fun, while sitting on a generator in DBD well, isn't. It makes DBD feel more like a mobile game then a full fletched one, simply because it feels so simplistic compared to F13. I have a feeling the bugs and glitches are the main reason people laid off of F13. I can't wrap my head around the fact that people find the gameplay in DBD more engaging then F13. How in the world is sitting on a generator for 80 seconds fun? It isn't. And I hate how the main objective of the game isn't fun.
As another user mentioned, I can still find a full lobby in F13 way faster then I ever could in DBD. And that's taking in the fact that F13 has larger lobbies then DBD does.
I still love both games. I can just never understand how people found DBD more engaging. I will admit though, I haven't played F13 too much ever since the lawsuit hit, simply because the lack of new content pulls me away from it. I will always love DBD and play it almost daily, but a part of me always misses the engaging objectives in F13, and makes me wish DBD would add more intriguing gameplay. Something like having to find the parts to a generator before you can repair it, or adding more ways to escape. But I understand that would be balance hell.
(Again, my example was only comparing Survivor vs Counselor gameplay, not any other aspect of both games).
"Fanboy" (well girl i guess) comment lol... and clearly lack of objectivity here.
There haven't been any decent competition, all the games you have listed are crap. It's like compairing a Boeing 737 and a light aircraft and saying that those ones have not succeed to embark 150 passengers...
Also, Evolve was a far better asymetrical game and got backslashed hardly by the video game press and then by gamers only for its lack of content at release while there was way more maps and better teamplay mechanics than in DbD. So some average games works while some great games die.
Concerning Dbd, many things have been done right (new killer licence, new maps, graphical update, server side hit validation on the way for exemple) and many other things have been done completely wrong.
The game is totally unbalanced. Against SWF, killers have a really hard time, against soloQ team, killers have ez wins.
Rank system is crap, too easy to rank up, everyday i see red rank survs/killers that are totally noobs and have nothing to do in high level of play. We are still waiting for a MMR system --> 4 years =)
There are way too many perks, most of them are useless, many should be removed.
Builds variety SHOULD be important in a team. There should be 2 pools of perks : one that all 4 survivors can equip in the team (Iron Will, Urban Evasion, Sprint Burst etc...) and another one where only 1 or 2 survivors max per quatuor can equip (DS, DH, unbreakable, We will make it, empathy, self care, unbreakable etc...).
Then you could hardly buff some of them : perks that favors healing should give really fast healing (empathy should be 200% healing speed, we will make it should be instant heal when you unhook etc...), perks that favors survivability should work better and be reworked, especially DS and DH etc... It will force survivors to have different builds, bring playstyle variety in every game as all 4 survivors won't be able to play the same way.
And even with big buffs, those perks wouldn't be as toxic as today beacause only 1 or 2 survivors would have them equiped. Teamplay possibilities would be awesome...
It would also nerf the communication in SWF because just saying "killer's on me" would be enough anymore, healers will have to stop doing gens to heal/unhook, healers would have to be immersed to stay alive while high survivability survivors would have to taunt the killer etc... Killer will also have more strategic choices.
Optimization is terrible. Game doesn't run well and for such a big playerbase game, optimization should be the priority number 1.
Some killers need to be nerfed : nurse learning curve is too high, she has to be easier to master but then she needs a nerf as when mastered, she is way too strong. Spirit is ok as she is but Stridor Spirit is a way too OP combo, so i guess Stridor should be removed.
Server side hit validation is a good thing but devs are too slow to release it.
Some killers rework are out of balance, PH in PTB is crazy strong for exemple...
See, there are many ways to improve the game and many problems have to be fixed. It is impossible that devs are happy with the current state of the game as we are not. I'm curious to see the satisfaction survey results...
Next chapter can be delayed for 2 months and devs should work on a "health operation" to clean everything and start on a better (if not greater) basis.
Oh and to know my DbD history : playing it since 2017. High skilled, red rank survivor with most of my games being soloQ. Finishing with the most points in most of my games. Favoring the team, able to hold a killer for a long time, sometimes failing.
As a killer, 3k to 4king almost everytime when i'm not against SWF. Being gen rushed in 4 minutes against SWF, getting 1k to 2k and those games are really frustrating cause totally not fun, nothing happens unless gens popping every 10 seconds.
People actually think Friday the 13th is the superior game? I thought it was a great concept, but fell flat on its face.
For one the gameplay loop was board up house, Jason spots you using wall hacks, then crawl out a window to board up another house. Repeat.
Jason was teleport then instant kill. Repeat.
Swf was even more heinous. You could have a group where one of their own becomes Jason. Guess who gets ######### over in those scenarios?
And the worst thing? If you left to do another match, you got an xp punishment. You have to stay the whole 20 minute match even if you died within the dirst minute to get all your experience.
Oh and the perk system was ######### awful. You think the bloodweb doesn't give you anything good? What the ######### am I supposed to do with an epic rarity perk that reduces tent breathing by 15%? What a ######### joke.
And then there's Resistance. It was mismanaged so horribly which is a crime since the game is actually very fun.
People actually think Friday the 13th is the superior game? I thought it was a great concept, but fell flat on its face.
For one the gameplay loop was board up house, Jason spots you using wall hacks, then crawl out a window to board up another house. Repeat.
Jason was teleport then instant kill. Repeat.
Swf was even more heinous. You could have a group where one of their own becomes Jason. Guess who gets ######### over in those scenarios?
And the worst thing? If you left to do another match, you got an xp punishment. You have to stay the whole 20 minute match even if you died within the dirst minute to get all your experience.
Oh and the perk system was ######### awful. You think the bloodweb doesn't give you anything good? What the ######### am I supposed to do with an epic rarity perk that reduces tent breathing by 15%? What a ######### joke.
And then there's Resistance. It was mismanaged so horribly which is a crime since the game is actually very fun.
And the worst thing? If you left to do another match, you got an xp punishment. You have to stay the whole 20 minute match even if you died within the dirst minute to get all your experience.
What I heard is that you received a bonus for staying, not that you were penalized for leaving.
And the worst thing? If you left to do another match, you got an xp punishment. You have to stay the whole 20 minute match even if you died within the dirst minute to get all your experience.
What I heard is that you received a bonus for staying, not that you were penalized for leaving.
It's still missed xp gains. Also they nerfed overall xp and stuffed it into events. It was lame.
Oh, did I also mention that literally everything you did tipped off Jason? Repair something? Jason teleports right on top of you. Try hiding? You have 3 seconds of holding your breath before he walks right over to your bed or closet for an instant kill.
Then there's survivors. Imagine that someone had 4 Decisive Strikes and that you could never catch up to someone if they crouch for a second. That was high level survivor gameplay against Jason. Then he resorts to the equivalent of slugging by spamming the chop till they're stunlocked and die.
It's still missed xp gains. Also they nerfed overall xp and stuffed it into events. It was lame.
Oh, did I also mention that literally everything you did tipped off Jason? Repair something? Jason teleports right on top of you. Try hiding? You have 3 seconds of holding your breath before he walks right over to your bed or closet for an instant kill.
Then there's survivors. Imagine that someone had 4 Decisive Strikes and that you could never catch up to someone if they crouch for a second. That was high level survivor gameplay against Jason. Then he resorts to the equivalent of slugging by spamming the chop till they're stunlocked and die.
It's still missed xp gains.
Yes, in the same sense that you "miss" BP in DbD by not performing certain actions. My point is, there was no penalty for leaving, there was a reward for staying. Those are two different things.
Also they nerfed overall xp and stuffed it into events. It was lame.
Yeah, that sounds like a bad design choice.
Oh, did I also mention that literally everything you did tipped off Jason? Repair something? Jason teleports right on top of you. Try hiding? You have 3 seconds of holding your breath before he walks right over to your bed or closet for an instant kill.
For the majority of the vocal DbD playerbase this would be a plus, since "hiding is boring" and "the fun is in the chase".
Then there's survivors. Imagine that someone had 4 Decisive Strikes and that you could never catch up to someone if they crouch for a second. That was high level survivor gameplay against Jason. Then he resorts to the equivalent of slugging by spamming the chop till they're stunlocked and die.
Yes, in the same sense that you "miss" BP in DbD by not performing certain actions. My point is, there was no penalty for leaving, there was a reward for staying. Those are two different things.
Also they nerfed overall xp and stuffed it into events. It was lame.
Yeah, that sounds like a bad design choice.
Oh, did I also mention that literally everything you did tipped off Jason? Repair something? Jason teleports right on top of you. Try hiding? You have 3 seconds of holding your breath before he walks right over to your bed or closet for an instant kill.
For the majority of the vocal DbD playerbase this would be a plus, since "hiding is boring" and "the fun is in the chase".
Then there's survivors. Imagine that someone had 4 Decisive Strikes and that you could never catch up to someone if they crouch for a second. That was high level survivor gameplay against Jason. Then he resorts to the equivalent of slugging by spamming the chop till they're stunlocked and die.
See above.
The survivors aren't all homogeneous like they are in DBD. Getting chased as the fat guy is instant death. That's a weak argument that the killer WANTS to be chasing them. Of course they want to chase them. It's an easy kill.
And stealth is ######### useless so they need to pull the equivalent of gen rush and repair everything quickly and gtfo.
Its what I have been saying! Competition is healthy but sadly.. DbD had a headstart and the indie DbD-wannabes that enter the market now lose all their players within a month or two due to severe lack of content.
@Orion that's cool but, on xbox yet again I can guaranteed find a lobby quicker than dbd any day of the week, any time of the day. It's not a dead game by any means.
While the game is not dead as even wirh 300 players it just has a very low player base.
Finding lobbies in the game is obviously quicker than DBD as you don't have a choice of what role you play just a preference.
DBD also splits up the player base with server locations so some find lobbies faster than others while F13th has everyone in one.
Tldr: This is an archived version of the DBD forum, it has all posts, comments and media. The archived data will be published at the end of October. This site is not in any way affiliated with or endorsed by Behaviour Interactive.
Comments
When you're playing against a team of survivors and you're the one in control of the zombies, yes it is.
But those games failing have nothing to do with DBD/BHVR. The devs of DBD did not make those games fail. They are not forcing us, the playerbase, to play DBD.
There are other options out there. DBD has thrived while others have failed largely due in part to a GROWING COMMUNITY and fun gameplay. Regardless how you feel and what you fail to understand, DBD has a rabid fanbase that continues to grow and thrive with the game.
Again, I don't really think you know what the term monopoly means.
Oh and I forgot RE: Resistance.
I have to disagree. Back when F13 was hot, DBD was in a much worse state. SO much has been improved since then. Yeah it could be better, but I think you're being overly harsh for dramatic effect.
@Orion
You keep mixing things...
That i value originality is my taste. Subjective.
That you can determine if a game is better at originality, or more original it's objective.
What if it's financial success is due to a better monetization strategy or better overall resources or more questionable goal grinding features but the game is lacking effort in every other department? Have you never experience something like this happening in the industry?
Is the Indie side of the industry worse than their AAA competitors? Do you find your metric coherent in a financial comparison between those?
Search the history for Battleforge or Dawngate.
EDIT: Also, i never implied that player preference is not related to popularity or financial success. What i'm implying is that financial success is not going to determine if a game is better than another due to lacking every other single objective factor that is involved in game design.
As you said if player preferences or tastes are subjective why should we take them into account in an objective comparison?
Yes this game really needs some serious competition. All the other games in this genre have been really bad, so far.
I never asked for an objective comparison, that was you who pulled "originality" out of thin air when I was asking how we could determine which game most players prefer. And you did imply player preference is unrelated to popularity and financial success, that was literally why you (and others) were mocking my statement to that effect.
What other metric would you use, then? I prefer to use things like player count (which correlates to financial success in a pay-to-play game) to determine whether people like to play a game because it seems objective. If people like it, they will continue to play it. If they don't, they won't.
You asked me for a "metric" which if the response you expected was not objective makes no sense...
Also player preferences can share objectiveness, as with Originality in my case, It depends on criteria and context.
Where did i imply that player preference is unrelated to popularity or financial success?
I was interested in baiting to discuss why someone would assume that financial success is traslated to a better game. If i wanted to mock you i would never have developed any argumentation after my first comment.
There have been quite a few other attempts at this specific style of survival horror games, which have been mentioned within this thread. Even now, "Phasmophobia" is gaining a steady following, with plans on adding the option to be the ghost in future (there's no plan for console scheduled). So it's not accurate to say it has a monopoly as it is not the only seller in this market.
It has a very successful business model, and despite the various complaints it received, it has devised and expanded on an idea - perhaps inspired by Left 4 Dead's showing that asymmetrical horror works - and developed its own place. Even if like-for-like, Identity V proves it's not a monopoly.
There will be more and more challengers in future. But they would need to come up with something original.
I actually had a ton of fun with RE Resistance and hoped it might work out. Haven't played it in a while since I moved to PC.
Capcom made the bizarre decision to bundle and keep it buncled with a critically panned remake.
@MandyTalk that's a bold statement claiming Friday the 13th died and didn't last as long as you. They just recently had an update to the game. I can log on there any day and guaranteed be in a lobby quicker than dead by daylight. I enjoy both games thoroughly but that's just simply a bold claim on your behalf.
You can literally just check the Steam player count for yourself and see that it dropped precipitously after launch.
@Orion that's cool but, on xbox yet again I can guaranteed find a lobby quicker than dbd any day of the week, any time of the day. It's not a dead game by any means.
Depends on your definition of "dead", I suppose. I can find some older games that still have a small playerbase (myself included), but I consider those to be dead regardless, because a few hundred players (and decreasing) is not an active game by any means.
So.... like all of the movies then?
@Zaitsev
The RE Resistance community may not be as popular on PC, but on console it is not the case.
You know, I thoroughly enjoy both games. I started playing DBD and F13 in August of 2017. However, from that August to June of 2018, F13 had most of my attention, while DBD was just a fun game on the side I would play here and there. It wasn't until the lawsuit that I started playing DBD 'full time' and essentially dropped F13.
But as you mentioned, even before the lawsuit, F13 had a significant less amount of players daily, and I never understood that. When soley comparing the Counselors and Survivors (Not Jason vs Killers) I never understood how someone could find Survivor more enjoyable then Counselor. The reason F13 had so much more of my attention was because of how fun the objectives were. Sitting on a static objective for 80 seconds (or 400 for all 5) while occasionally pressing spacebar is not fun, nor is it engaging or challenging. At least with counselor you would have to search for your objective pieces, and install them, all while defending yourself and your teammates from Jason. Not to mention the game had more ways to escape and the counselors were unique. Which offered very varied ways to approach certain objectives. As opposed to the bland Survivors of DBD. Yes perks exist, but F13 had perks on top of Counselors being unique as well. It also made the objectives in F13 pretty challenging if you were using a Counselor with low Repair stats. And as we all know, the main objective of DBD isn't challenging at all, and that makes it no fun in my opinion. Not to mention it was a lot more satisfying watching the gruesome kills in F13 then it is watching the Entity kill a hooked person, or even watching the Mori's, which feature little to no gore at all.
My point being, the objectives in F13 were actually fun, while sitting on a generator in DBD well, isn't. It makes DBD feel more like a mobile game then a full fletched one, simply because it feels so simplistic compared to F13. I have a feeling the bugs and glitches are the main reason people laid off of F13. I can't wrap my head around the fact that people find the gameplay in DBD more engaging then F13. How in the world is sitting on a generator for 80 seconds fun? It isn't. And I hate how the main objective of the game isn't fun.
As another user mentioned, I can still find a full lobby in F13 way faster then I ever could in DBD. And that's taking in the fact that F13 has larger lobbies then DBD does.
I still love both games. I can just never understand how people found DBD more engaging. I will admit though, I haven't played F13 too much ever since the lawsuit hit, simply because the lack of new content pulls me away from it. I will always love DBD and play it almost daily, but a part of me always misses the engaging objectives in F13, and makes me wish DBD would add more intriguing gameplay. Something like having to find the parts to a generator before you can repair it, or adding more ways to escape. But I understand that would be balance hell.
(Again, my example was only comparing Survivor vs Counselor gameplay, not any other aspect of both games).
Don't you dare touch my nurse
People actually think Friday the 13th is the superior game? I thought it was a great concept, but fell flat on its face.
For one the gameplay loop was board up house, Jason spots you using wall hacks, then crawl out a window to board up another house. Repeat.
Jason was teleport then instant kill. Repeat.
Swf was even more heinous. You could have a group where one of their own becomes Jason. Guess who gets ######### over in those scenarios?
And the worst thing? If you left to do another match, you got an xp punishment. You have to stay the whole 20 minute match even if you died within the dirst minute to get all your experience.
Oh and the perk system was ######### awful. You think the bloodweb doesn't give you anything good? What the ######### am I supposed to do with an epic rarity perk that reduces tent breathing by 15%? What a ######### joke.
And then there's Resistance. It was mismanaged so horribly which is a crime since the game is actually very fun.
And the worst thing? If you left to do another match, you got an xp punishment. You have to stay the whole 20 minute match even if you died within the dirst minute to get all your experience.
What I heard is that you received a bonus for staying, not that you were penalized for leaving.
It's still missed xp gains. Also they nerfed overall xp and stuffed it into events. It was lame.
Oh, did I also mention that literally everything you did tipped off Jason? Repair something? Jason teleports right on top of you. Try hiding? You have 3 seconds of holding your breath before he walks right over to your bed or closet for an instant kill.
Then there's survivors. Imagine that someone had 4 Decisive Strikes and that you could never catch up to someone if they crouch for a second. That was high level survivor gameplay against Jason. Then he resorts to the equivalent of slugging by spamming the chop till they're stunlocked and die.
It's still missed xp gains.
Yes, in the same sense that you "miss" BP in DbD by not performing certain actions. My point is, there was no penalty for leaving, there was a reward for staying. Those are two different things.
Also they nerfed overall xp and stuffed it into events. It was lame.
Yeah, that sounds like a bad design choice.
Oh, did I also mention that literally everything you did tipped off Jason? Repair something? Jason teleports right on top of you. Try hiding? You have 3 seconds of holding your breath before he walks right over to your bed or closet for an instant kill.
For the majority of the vocal DbD playerbase this would be a plus, since "hiding is boring" and "the fun is in the chase".
Then there's survivors. Imagine that someone had 4 Decisive Strikes and that you could never catch up to someone if they crouch for a second. That was high level survivor gameplay against Jason. Then he resorts to the equivalent of slugging by spamming the chop till they're stunlocked and die.
See above.
The survivors aren't all homogeneous like they are in DBD. Getting chased as the fat guy is instant death. That's a weak argument that the killer WANTS to be chasing them. Of course they want to chase them. It's an easy kill.
And stealth is ######### useless so they need to pull the equivalent of gen rush and repair everything quickly and gtfo.
Its what I have been saying! Competition is healthy but sadly.. DbD had a headstart and the indie DbD-wannabes that enter the market now lose all their players within a month or two due to severe lack of content.
While the game is not dead as even wirh 300 players it just has a very low player base.
Finding lobbies in the game is obviously quicker than DBD as you don't have a choice of what role you play just a preference.
DBD also splits up the player base with server locations so some find lobbies faster than others while F13th has everyone in one.