This is why I genuinely dislike the devs sometimes
From the Q&A sum up:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Genzo - Have you considered making AFK crows appear above survivors who don't touch generators for a certain amount of time?
In principle, this would be nice to help prevent hostage games, but how much time is okay? It'd either be too lenient and serve no purpose, or too harsh and punishing. It could be abused; would you tap a gen to reset the timer, or would you have to work on it for a certian amount of time? If it's tap, it solves nothing, if it's working for a certain amount of time it takes games where the killer is snowballing very quickly and makes them even harder to win. It's not that it's necesarily an incorrect feature, it's just that it's much more complex than this. Therefore the short answer is a no.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I mean, im almost at a loss for words....like how...what....I....
Ok, how did you ever do ANYTHING at all in this game? Did you not have to for example define movement speed of survivors? movement speed of killers? yes lets go THAT basic.
If the killer goes too fast the chases end too fast and survivors just lose
If the killer goes too slow the chases never end and survivors just win
"omg so complex, therefor the short answer is, lets not make a game"
^that is pretty much exactly what was said in that answer.
Did you not a little earlier spoke of how DS went through multiple itterations? man its almost like its hard to get something perfect on the first go, thank god we can patch stuff right?
JUST PICK SOME NUMBERS AND RULES YOU THINK ARE REASONABLE, PUT THEM IN THE DAMN GAME, THEN WE, THE PLAYERS, WILL GIVE FEEDBACK ON IT AND BASED ON THAT AND THE STATS YOU WILL GATHER OVER THE TIME ITS ACTIVE, WILL DETERMINE IF/WHAT CHANGES NEED TO BE MADE.
This is as basic as just about doing anything in life gets people, seriously what the F.....
And on DS, not really the topic at hand but still, why do the devs never just freaking do what suggestions the community makes that are relatively agreed upon? Ya know, infinite DS but no actions allowed other then movement and being healed or healing yourself? JUST FREAKING TEST IT, like you tested the no bloodlust or how you suddenly changed how toolboxes get used.
Comments
What was actually said was that that particular idea would not be a good one. As for why the devs "never just freaking do what suggestions the community makes that are relatively agreed upon", it's because:
The thing I'm not a fan of is that they theorised 2 extremes and shot them down, and then came to the conclusion that it would be a bad idea. Like the whole thing about "tap or not-tap" is so weird. You have a test build for a reason lol, try both versions out and then look for some numbers in the middle. You can actually test this ######### in a test build, you don't need to theory craft every possible outcome. Thought you guys liked gathering data?
im sorry Orion but your defensive arguments are always "you dont know man, could be really hard" and it just isnt, but if you want to believe that go right ahead, I attach zero value to that mindset, and yeah if I was their boss I would not be making a forum thread would I? I would tell them to freaking put in some effort.
The devs saying they tested something and they did not like it is disgusting to say the least, by your own words, WE ARE THE CONSUMERS, not them, cant have it both ways.
Remember them fixing the beachball hatchet from Huntress? I do, the showed what made it so messed up, they "fixed" it, it went horrible wrong, they reverted and now its just the same flawed design as it was at the start, flawed by their own admitance I might add, but "way too hard to fix yo".
That speaks volumes for me and it should for anyone really.
Hey can I just remind you, official information, unofficially worded. Anything I added should be in italics, like me describing in detail the previous iterations of DS. What they actually said was something along the lines of "For anyone who hasn't been playing for a while, DS has been changed quite a bit already". I added in the rest of the information myself for some extra context.
Anything lost in translation between my notes and what they actually said is entirely my fault. I'd highly suggest watching the stream if you want to take apart a topic in detail.
Aside from this, please refer to @Orion for putting my thoughts into text better than I ever could.
im sorry Orion but your defensive arguments are always "you dont know man, could be really hard" and it just isnt, but if you want to believe that go right ahead, I attach zero value to that mindset, and yeah if I was their boss I would not be making a forum thread would I? I would tell them to freaking put in some effort.
If people didn't make arguments based on claiming they have knowledge they can't have, I wouldn't have to state the same thing over and over again. Your complaint is like saying that a mathematician's answer to "2+2=5" is always "2+2=4".
Just out of curiosity, are you a programmer or game developer?
The devs saying they tested something and they did not like it is disgusting to say the least, by your own words, WE ARE THE CONSUMERS, not them, cant have it both ways.
How is that having it both ways? A company makes a product and the consumers either like it or they don't. However, companies are not required to make things people like. The ones who don't, fail. That's how capitalism works.
Remember them fixing the beachball hatchet from Huntress? I do, the showed what made it so messed up, they "fixed" it, it went horrible wrong, they reverted and now its just the same flawed design as it was at the start, flawed by their own admitance I might add, but "way too hard to fix yo".
I do too. That's an example of a bad fix that looked good on paper, but wasn't in practice.
That speaks volumes for me and it should for anyone really.
That the devs are willing to admit when they ######### up? Yes, it should. It's a good thing.
Nothing about your wording is important here, this is purely about facts, DS was brought up BECAUSE it has seen different itterations BECAUSE the initial implementation was not good.
Same for, oh idk, Pop, which had its timer nerfed, EXACTLY WHAT THE ######### WE ARE TALKING ABOUT REGARDING THESE ######### CROWS...
That mic just disintegrated
...never even had a chance to hit the floor 🔥🔥🔥
Flawlessly put into words exactly what I was feeling. Thank you for that😌
I agree on all but your last point.
After this patch and the abysmal state the game is in, they could just start testing things and it honestly wouldn't make much of a difference XD
Okay, you're not an apologist. You're just one of those people who likes to tell people "they don't have to make a good game or listen to consumer opinions if they don't want to" when frustrations with the game are at a fever pitch.
Also no. Read this again, but more carefully:
I've criticized the devs before and will do so again, but I also hate it when people misrepresent what they say.
Actually, yes. You used different wording but you basically told the OP that it's up to the devs if they want to make an enjoyable product. That is one of the most common apologist troll arguments and also about as informative as saying "bhvr makes this game."
@Orion as much as you (and i ) don't like @BioX wording, he does have a point. Not testing something because of some edge cases is worse than having to deal with said cases. Tweaks could be made along the way since the playerbase will give feedback and also data could be gathered, but that can only happen if such a change is made.
To address the example of hatchets. The problem was that the hitbox was giving unfair hits to huntress while the fix for it rendered her power useless as almost all environment objects were destroying her hatchets. The fix was worse than the original issue so it was a no-brainer that it was reverted.
The current issue we are discussing is the hostage situation when survivors are hiding and the killer cannot force EGC to activate. At that point the chances for both survivors to escape is low and the crows will just help the killer end the match sooner. They discussed about tap - no tap condition to deactivate, well any kind of action could reset the timer, they didn't even consider it. They speculate that the worst case scenario would benefit killers when they are already winning, they don't have any data supporting it, yet they don't even consider trying it out. And i want to remind you again, that the initial problem was a hostage situation which is a banable offense, so it should be addressed by the devs somehow and they should allocate time for it.
Im not demanding anything....seriously man what is wrong with you, I am saying why the devs often genuingle piss me off, hence the title and the reason for it is completely logical.
Simply not doing something because its either too powerful or too weak and its "oh so hard" to balance does not make ANY sense at all.
Its literally the one thing they have to do constantly with EVERYTHING they do in this game, its beyond stupid.
Im not even demanding they change things really, I have given up on that pipedream about 3 - 4 years ago which is sad.
But the fact is, and again the reason why I even made this topic, is the devs just being unwilling to even try things, even very simple things, they just do stuff that seemingly nobody asked for and ignore the things people do ask for, DS adjustments, nope, no no way too difficult even though we make and adjust perks all the time, but lets turn of bloodlust, yes thats the ticket!
It's not a matter of wording. The OP was blatantly misrepresenting the devs' statements and opinions.
All they said was that, in their opinion, the AFK crows mechanic applied to generator repair is too easily abusable and can lead to unintentional scenarios where someone who is contributing to the game still gets crows. Given how even the most obscure exploits are found and heavily abused in DbD, I think considering the "worst case scenario", as you put it, is perfectly reasonable.
They didn't say that nothing would be done (unless I'm misremembering), just that that particular mechanic is a bad one.
Some ideas are bad and don't need to be tried just because people ask for them. For example, slowing sacrificial speed when the killer is near the hook. This was a very popular request (I myself supported it back in the day), but proved to have unforeseen consequences; ridiculous scenarios that nobody could have foreseen. Even now it's a fairly popular request, and when its issues are pointed out, people react in the exact same way as you. They say that the devs just need to add more conditions, more balancing, etc., until they get it right, instead of just accepting that the mechanic is bad and that the devs' time would be better spent looking for another solution.
I don't always agree with their decisions (for example, I disagree with whomever decided to release the current DLC instead of delaying it), but the fact is that they have a better view of the game's inner workings and the overall data than any of us. On that basis alone, I believe they are in a better position to determine what is and isn't workable than anyone.
It doesn't matter if a solution works perfectly if it's not possible to implement in a reasonable amount of time.
EDIT: Regarding Bloodlust, it was always intended as a temporary mechanic and many people have requested it be removed since it was implemented (and before, they were requesting that it not be added at all).
That is why i wrote they didn't even consider to reset the timer on other actions, like unhooking a survivor, cleansing a totem, etc. The timer could be something like 4-5 min and perform an action for x amount of seconds or finish it (for example interaction time is 8 seconds and unhooking takes 2-3 seconds, if you unhooked the survivor, you reset your timer). I already said the issue is worth spending time because it leads to a hostage situation. If they were to release a mechanic like this, they could determine if the new problems are worse than the hostage situation or not, and if they aren't, they could tweak the mechanic according to the stats and feedback.
Also regarding the second part where you wrote about the devs having better insight, i wouldn't give them that much credit because i work in software development and sometimes management decides to release broken builds just for the sake of releasing "on time" despite being warned by the developers that it's not yet ready.