New chapter out and playerbase still not increasing
When will it finally be time for BHVR to acknowledge the fact chapters will only increase the playerbase for a short period of time,but now not even that because of the glaring issues the game suffers from.
These are the main reasons I think its driving people away,old or new:
SBMMR is not working at all.
Encountering cheaters daily.
New games of the genre coming out soon.
The fact 90% of your games as survivor are againts campers and tunnelers,because its a strategy that just works in the current meta of rushing gens then dip.
Playing killer is not fun because playing the game normally without camping or tunneling is tedious and feels unrewarding.
Insane grind that's very unfriendly especially to new players.
Game has become too stale because BHVR never took a risk until now,since they didn't need to.
Game is missing basic quality of life features that other games of the genre have.
Comments
Yeah, I think you're just arguing for the sake of arguing here. I'm out.
Just because you didnt apply occam's razor correctly, Dont mean I argue for the sake of arguing.
I receive a reply, I get a ping on the website and ill give an answer if I can.
Thank you, I thought I was losing my mind reading some of these comments. 100% agreed. This does not require a PhD in mathematics to understand. Couple points I wanted to piggyback onto your post:
1.) If someone thinks that steam player numbers are going to vary significantly from other platforms, they need to provide a reason for that discrepancy. Obviously it's not going to be a 1 to 1 comparison but in the absence of a good reason, it's very fair to assume that it'll be pretty damn close to a 1 to 1 comparison. If anyone disagrees - please explain why steam numbers would vary dramatically from other platforms
3.) The counterargument to this sounds like an "agnostic" argument. Since the steam numbers aren't 100% accurate, they are completely untrustworthy, and because we can't have a perfect 100% accurate study, we will therefore never know if the player numbers are dropping or not.
A 42% drop is huge. Even if the steam numbers weren't very accurate (let's say in the range of +/- 15%, which they are almost assuredly NOT that inaccurate), that would still indicate a very large drop off in the playerbase. Does anyone REALLY believe that the steam numbers are off by +/- 50%? That would be an absolutely ludricrous claim to make without evidence
Well, I'll be always playing this #########, I really like this game
There will always be people playing this game regardless of the state it's in because just like you, they still enjoy the game.
...and it's not how the game was back when I started around 2017 or 18 I believe. I swear as a new killer and surv I was consistently matched with newbs too.
No you don't.
You literally just said in a previous comment, "I cant be asked to write more about it."
Your entire argument has just been, "I'm right because I said so, prove me wrong."
@StarLost is right. You clearly aren't arguing in good faith.
You're missing my point - there are only a few games released in 2016 that still have 35-40k or more concurrent players on Steam. Civ 6 just happens to be the one that seems to be closest to DbD in current playerbase.
And FYI Civilization VI has released something like 17 DLC sets including some last year. So it's not like they hadn't been releasing new content on a regular basis. You can say it's not a "live service" but neither DbD nor Civilization is a "subscription service", they're both games you buy full price and then can optionally buy DLC for. They're not actually all that different in that respect.
Removing perk tiers is technically not a permanent fix, but it could solve problems.
Yes, there is a difference between replying to a long post with many different fallacies, assumptions. etc
and then someone who thinks Occam's razor can be applied like that.
I am sorry, that it disrupts your narrative, but I never said I was right, just applying critical thinking to the arguments made in the community.
Ringu was cool. Im happy Sadako's in the game. Sadly Resident Evil/Silent Hill are IPs that gamers are more familiar with so thats why they attract new players.
With that being said, what other game IPs could help boost the playerbase? Don't say Bioshock or Dead Space.
Yet each civ game hell every expansion has massive changes to baseline mechanics. The best we got was a half assed egc. There still no comeback mechanics.any crucial baseline mechanics are locked behind a perk system with and archaic 3 tiers of progression.
Even then civ makes sequels dbd does not. Live service games tend to involve significantly more patching and a consitently evolving play enviroment. Dbd has none of that. Unveiling perks that often get bined because there are little actual flex slots for either killer or survivor. Also subscription services for singular games are for the most part a dead concept or at the very least unfavourable unless your attached to an existing juggernaut of a game. The battle pass has mostly taken the place of the subscription service tbh.
Well I'm not going to try and argue with you about whether or not DbD could have done this or that in the game. That's all speculative and really beside the point I was making which is, in terms of how many people play this game versus play other games that came out in 2016, it's doing exceptionally well.
I tried to make a proper discussion but as @StarLost said 'you're just arguing for the sake of arguing'.
Plus you've made a pretty heavy assumption in that BHVR have better data (which i don't doubt) but that they are competently trying to improve the game (which I do doubt).
You said you've had discussions on twitter etc, from what I've seen here you're not interested in discussing.
At no point did I say 'number go down go bad'
Completely agree with all the above, in conclusion Steam stats don't offer a full proof 100% fact but in essence an extremely strong and in my opinion indisputable fact that the numbers and down (and significantly so)
I can understand being asked to verify ones claims, can seem like not wanting to discuss. But it IS in fact the first step before discussion.
My verification is simply its the facts available to us, as previously stated a high sample size play on steam therefore the point is valid. Claims verified, over to you to discuss
Cute, but that's not how you verify a claim, but it is how you make the fallacy of incomplete evidence or cherry picking fallacy.
How do we verify claims, research, and if data dont exist, we do a proper study. Good luck with that.
Steam playerbase is the data, it does exist
FNAF. I never played it, I'm not a fan but if they finally release an FNAF chapter:
1- People stop asking for it, they're are starting to be a nuissance.
2- It will bring a good amount of new players.
its called elden ring
This year dbd will face some heavy competition for their playerbase.
It does not verify your assumption that its its a high sample size or your assumption that concurrent average/peak are worthy metrics to determine that.
Till they remove sbmm the playerbase will go down no matter what
u guys are obsessed. I don't even like to defend this crap game, but u guys are all over those steam charts. it's normal
you guys want them to fail so bad
Why give up all that momentum they built. Old killer designs like the shape and nurse was daring interesting and unique and put dbd on the map. Concepts like a blinking killer and a killer who stares and stalks you with the capabilites to instakill was what propel dbd to greatness. Now every power resembles each other with anti loop and survivor perks that do the same crap. Side note they took a chance with boons and i 100% believe long term they will be good for dbd mild changes like breaking totems after being snuffed should resolve a lot of there issues. But killer designs are too safe.
Sadako condemn should be ticking clock that spreads the curse across the team. Trickster should have ricohet base kit. Pyramid heads ranged attacks should increase based off of afflicted survivors. Pigs traps shouldnt be just a glorified time waster they should tick faster the more gens are done and they should require multiple keys not one. Again these ideas are daring they bring all sort of concerns and worries but playing it safe isnt what propeled dbd this far. Ever since legion dbd has been to frightened to take risks (the fact we got the blight is a miracle).
Its ridiclous yes something busted is going to get through when you take risks but thats why you have measures in advance prepared just in case a killer or survivor perk is overtuned. Exhaustion is severly underdeveloped in terms of actual ways to influence it and with each update effectively limited by the max perks both side can have instead of adding baseline modifiers. (Lets be real some form of ds should be basekit). The abscence of comeback mechanics for both sides. Hatch does not count.
Dbd should be daring. No one actually wants a balanced dbd if it involves playing against the same crap all the time.
Don't forget, Elden Ring came out a week ago and no doubt has stolen a chunk of players, especially PC ones.
On the contrary, if you take random samples out of those charts with the months as a categoric value and make a t student test for each one the accuracy of the parameter can be pretty good, so as far as you are saying yes you might be right about fallacies but stayistically that data is more than enough to understand if the last months show a significant decrease on dbd players, specially because they are averages which is a very good test statiscic for things like a t test or even an ANOVA test if the distributions are normal, check if I said something false because im pretty sure this an actual good proposition for multiple statistical analysis with the steamcharts data as a sample of the dbd population.
Killer should be the feature of this game, but BHVR keep taking care of swf which make solo survivor and killer can't enjoy the game.
And the new killer also not helping for killer side to kill more, that why playerbase will keep drop.
I guess we can safely say the new chapter failed to bring more new people or old ones back.
I'm glad this finally proved BHVR,that just adding new killer and survivor is not enough to fix a game that has so many health problems is unbelievable.
The new bugs after the new chapter proves just how many issues this game has.
Hell if pc are leaving console must happen the same they basically have worse problems.
I dont disbute the possibility that numbers been going down, but you gotta realize most people blame specific game changes for these issues. They dont just say, 'oh no the numbers are down, but we dont know why' nono, they have reasons and they dont justify those.
Usually when I question them, the goal post shifts from mmr is the reason to the 'oh no the numbers are down, but we dont know why'
which is pretty telling of whats actually going on.
I'm not sure you understand how this works.
I'm saying that Steamcharts are a representative sample size. You haven't even tried to demonstrate that it isn't.
Common sense and data theory both support me here. This is how statistical analysis works - you take a sample and survey them, drawing a statistically significant conclusion about the population at large.
Now, you could say 'well, Steamcharts are fake' or 'PC players are leaving for x reason and console players aren't'. But neither of these work, because you are inferring a counterargument that is intuitively less likely to be true than mine, and you aren't making any effort to prove them - you're just asserting and negating. This is where Ockham comes into play.
When there is a preponderance of evidence against your position, then the burden of proof shifts to you to prove it.
Yes. And there's nothing wrong with that.
At best, this is a form of a goalposts fallacy mixed with a little bit of sealioning. At worst, it's an AFF fallacy - you are attempting to shift the argument from 'numbers are down' (which players can safely assert based on data available to everyone via Steamcharts) to 'why are numbers down?'. That's something nobody can 'prove', probably not even the devs.
Let me put this another way.
If I say 'less people are riding the bus this month as shown by this sample', you saying 'well you can't prove *why* they aren't therefore your assertion isn't true' is a non-sequitur. You can't refute the antecedent by shifting the argument like that.
If you want to refute the antecedent, your response needs to be something along the lines of 'no, the same number of people are riding the bus because my dataset is more reliable than yours, and here it is'.
Why do I have to prove a negative? thats not how anything works. If you are saying something, then you ought to demonstrate it. I don't have to prove you are wrong, if you said 'There are Aliens' I dont have to prove there are not Aliens.
Common sense is also a fallacy, perspectives are always going to be different, you are basically appealing to your own opinion as proof, which I don't see why I would buy.
I have talked to two statisticians about the data theory, none of them have said such things about data theory. They said it isnt an insurance of it being correct. You say its statistically significant but you have no way of increasing sample size to prove it is significant. Its a buzzword you use to prop up your claim, because you cant prove that correct either. The statisticians I talked to about this said, There isnt a way you can make a conclusion based on such specific data collection, unless you can negate other factors having an impact, that is why they would make a better study an answer the question or if that is impossible don't.
Now tell me why I should believe you, over independent statisticians I have consulted about these questions, Twice in fact.
Sigh, okay. Last try.
But let me throw the ball back to you. Why is Steamcharts not a representative sample? Be as specific as you can.
You literally asked me, this:
You haven't even tried to demonstrate that it isn't.
If you believe steam charts is a representative sample size, you ought to be able to prove it. Its not my job. Its pretty clear to me you are trying your hardest to shift the burden of proof onto me. And I'm not even claiming anything, I merely ask how do you guys know these things.
'How do you know MMR is killing the game?'
'How do you know the numbers are not down for any other reason?'
'Why is Steamcharts a representative sample? and can you prove that?'
You even try to shift the burden of proof again by appealing to common sense, which is utterly subjective. I dont even know why you think, I would be convinced by such a thing. Next you try with occam's razor fallacy, an appeal to simplicity, which you try to pass off as a general rule of the world or something. Yet the world is not governed by such a concept, making the idea quite useless and unconvincing for me. I never said you should believe me, because I consulted two statisticians, I asked you why I should believe you over them? But that is besides the point of your arguments making so little sense in text, that I would reject it based on how many fallacies you provide me.
The severe lack of explanatory power, the blatant use of buzzwords and fallacies to make an argument is gonna keep me skeptical for a long time mate.
Sigh, this feels like I'm back tutoring Phil101 again.
I would feel sorry for your students if this is how you teach.
Now, you've dismissed the idea of 'common sense', which makes me suspect some sort of Post-Modernist leaning, likely rendering any further discourse pointless.
As you claim to have a working knowledge of stats.
I don't believe I have claimed this, if so it was in error, I have worked with statistics in college and uni in my home country. However you as a teacher and as an expert married to another expert, surely you should be able to convince me or maybe your wife can.
<> Let's assume, for the sake of the argument,
How about we don't assume that, how about you demonstrate your assumption is valid by showing me the numbers of the other platforms? Oh wait you cant do that, so why does it matter? Its pretty clear to me, if you cant provide any insurance for the claims or verify it, its gonna be a waste of time.
Not only a waste of time for us, but also a waste of time in general since BHVR is gonna be working independent of us.
Did that make sense?
Not really.
You are essentially strawmanning here, because you are treating feedback on a videogame forum as if people were in a formal debate.
Questioning people for their rationale is not a strawman argument. Its perfectly okay to ask questions to videogame feedback.
Your two statisticians-of-debatable-existence served no purpose but to act as an AFA.
I'm sorry if you think I was bringing them up as an argument from authority, but I never claimed you should believe me, because of a discussion I have had with others. Again, please read again, I asked you why I should take your word for it when I already consulted some independently, I mean you are the guy whos appealing to common sense, yet I talked to others and then disagree with you, so the common sense isn't so common it seems.
(rolls eyes).
But again, this is a pointless discussion that I've mostly been treating as a mental exercise. If you actually want to have a discussion - establish a position of your own and we can compare the two. Otherwise I'm going to go and do something more productive.
(rolls eyes).
If this is the attitude you want to take, I don't know why you are even here. I'm replying to your questions and requests for my own position. If you do not wish to talk about this, then I suggest we stop now. Like you keep saying I only answer to annoy you. Maybe you SHOULD do something more productive.
My position is that I am skeptical of the claims made about the game and I ask for evidence for ideas I don't believe in.
Because prima facie - you can easily observe this yourself by playing the game or watching streamers playing the game and taking note of the platforms in question as displayed in the lobby. No proofs are required, this is just sealioning on your behalf.
I negate fallacies, like the bandwagon fallacy, what they think of the game irrelevant to me. It is not sealioning cause I would not be here replying if you didn't do the same.
If you didn't want to use them as scaffolding for your argument, then why bring them up at all?
Maybe you are finally getting that I don't hold a position of my own on this. I brought them up cause you brought up common sense.
this is a pointless discussion that I've mostly been treating as a mental exercise.
Do you feel you are getting your workout? 🤣
Actually, this month went from -5% to -3.33%. Yay?
And you have never heard of terms like "projection", "trend", ... ?
Here is an idea that may blow your mind : if a product's sales on a platform drops, it is likely other platforms are following the same path. (But hey, maybe on Switch there are hundreds of new users each day and we never heard about it ...)
Sure I have heard those before. How many users have left the game on Switch? Do you know?
In fact the highest peak players over the last 30 days is today. So yes, the game has gotten a player boost since Sadako went live on the 8th. It’s not increased enough to make up for the losses in the prior six months but it has increased.
Well, yes, I believe the increase was obvious (now at -3.16%).
Of course we are far from the RE chapter influx.
I think they have reached a point where only greediness it's what shows.. Im not installing the game again unless they start caring about all the issues they ignore. So for me its simple.. only DLC, skins and poor quality content? No thanks.
If one day they start caring about balance, quality and change boring core mechanics maybe and only maybe i will come back.
And some broken perks/items/addons/rng maps.
This game will always have some questionable features, but I still have fun for the most part. They desperately need to improve the grind though.
Same