Player Entitlement in this community is Unbelievable
Shortly after loading into Haddonfield, (one of the many maps that doesn't favour Knight without Call to Arms), I am greeted with the Ada in the middle of the street. She gives up the moment she sees me and doesn't move the whole match. I want to finish the game ASAP so I can verse a team of survivors that actually want to play the game. So I down her and go after the other survivors. The Mikaela gives up as well shortly afterwards. Once everyone is dead I go to the end-game chat to ask why someone would give up at the drop of a hat. This was the brief conversation we had:
I want to preface the argument I'm about to make with some very important facts:
- I am fully aware that DbD isn't a balanced game in the slightest.
- I am fully aware that Knight isn't fun to verse for most people.
- I do not think people should be forced to keep playing a game they find unfun.
Now with that being said...
The people who act like this, who give up the moment a game starts because they have to go against something they don't like, are among the most entitled and toxic people in the DbD community.
I'll now explain why using the Ada in my game as an example. As you may have noticed she's a P100 player, like me. So she would have had to put in at least several hundred hours into the game. Likely over one thousand hours in total. With that in mind it's safe to assume that she is aware of elements of the game that aren't very well designed, or just not to her liking. And that by loading up the game, clicking the "Play Survivor" button, and finding a lobby, that there is a chance that she will encounter something that she doesn't like.
I will testify that there are absolutely things that I hate having to deal with as P100 Knight. Well over 50% of the maps in the game just do not favour him. And if you want to win on these maps you have to pick up the slack of the bad map design and play near flawlessly most of the time. It isn't fair, it isn't balanced, but that's just how DbD is.
I know that when I load into a game there's a high chance that I am going to struggle if I want to do well. It's a fact that I accept because I like playing the character so much and I'm willing to put up with stuff like this so I can enjoy being Knight.
But that does not make it ok to ruin the game for 4 other people simply because someone has to deal with something they don't like. In this case, it was a specific killer. I know that some of you who bothered to read this looked at my build and are thinking: "Knock-Out on Knight? Well of course they gave up! No one wants to be slugged."
Except that the Ada gave up the instant she realised that she was against a Knight. I hadn't even gotten a single down and this person single-handedly ruined the game of 4 other people because they thought they were above dealing with something poorly designed in DbD. People like Ada really don't care about how other people play. They have an arbitrary list of things that they personally don't like. And if they encounter any of these things they will not hesitate to throw the game, or give up, or DC, because they cannot fathom dealing with something they don't like.
Let me break this down for you...
- This player likely put in thousands of hours to P100 a character.
- They did this despite knowing how "unfun" the game was for them.
- They knowingly and willing loaded up the game to play a match with 4 other people who all have to deal with the exact same "unfun" things that they do.
- And the moment they encounter something that they don't like, they prioritise themselves over everyone else because they feel they don't have to deal with things like the other people who also play this game.
- And they repeat this over, and over, and over again because they simply don't care about the other players. Even though they are the only reason they are able to find matches in the first place.
I want to make clear that giving up or DC'ing during a game isn't always a bad thing necessarily. If the game is basically over and the killer is just hooking/waiting for everyone to bleed out because of bad hook spawns, then DC'ing just helps end the game faster for everyone. Or if your 3 team mates just ran into the jaws of a camping Leatherface there simply isn't much you can do and giving up prevents the game from stalling and lets you move onto another match as soon as possible.
And I need to state again that I am not making excuses for the terrible design decisions of this game. We all know that DbD is light-years away from perfect. But if you're going to make the choice of playing it then you have to accept that, at some point, you are going to deal with things that you don't find fun.
And if you don't want to deal with things that you don't find fun, that's totally fine! Load up a different, better made game like DRG and enjoy yourself there. You aren't being held hostage. You are free to do something that, unlike DbD, you know you will enjoy.
But if you keep loading into games, knowing full well what might await you, and you keep DC'ing or giving up, ruining what little fun was left to be had for everyone else, and then refuse to take accountability for your actions...
Then you are part of the problem. And you need to uninstall this game.
EDIT 02/06: Arguing against some of the "counter-arguments" on this thread has been exhausting.
Comments
Bots won't replace hook suiciders/griefers tho
And they're not wrong with penalizing, considering how fragile a certain part of community is and how much it messes up other ppl experience.
Griefers and people who hook suicide aren't punished now either.
Yep, and that's a problem. And smh it is normalised in the DBD community :')
I don't really care about it, honestly.
There's not really a way to punish it and I'm not interested in pursuing it.
Well, that's an example of what I've been talking about
"We don't care, it's OK, they may proceed" while it's def not ok
You can be equivalent to 10 players in CoD and Battlefield. The difference is quite large.
Nice, you picked exactly the two exceptions to the whole ordeal because of big team sizes and refill.
Cod and battlefield have teamsizes of 12+ people (hence why no one brings them up in these discussions), so the individual DC doesn't matter, just like in a 10-25 person raid in wow (btw even there, leaving a 5 people dungeon group locks you out of queue for a certain time).
And ow qp? Really? As if anyone gave anything about that mess when playing with randoms, the game is already chaos as is, plus it also has refill.
Uh boy, more "excellent" comparison.
Fortnite, apex, Pubg and so on are huge free for all's with 100 people playing against each other.
If I am informed correctly you can even intentionally join as solo into duo or team queue and team sizes aren't even matched.
Either you play as a team with premades, where ragequitting can be punished by no longer replaying with them, or with randoms, which aren't really any kind of help since there is no real coordination aka when they leave it doesn't make much of a difference.
Pretty sure that's a subjective opinion.
Also, please refrain from putting words in my mouth. I didn't say it was OK. I specifically said that I did not CARE, not that it was okay.
There's not exactly a plethora of asym games out there.
Casual multiplayer games do not punish for leaving a casual match often. Comp? Sure. But a QP style match with barebones matchmaking isn't often met with bans for leaving.
DBD is an anomaly and I find it intriguing
So what about killers who will give up early the min they slip up and fail to down a survivor and loses just one gen and dcs? They are ruining the 4 survivors time too.
Like I mentioned, WoW and for example league of legends also punish for leaving, even in casual queue, because even a single leaver has a big impact on such small team sizes.
I don't know how it is with a leaver penalty in casual queue ATM in rainbow six siege or rocket league, two other games with fixed small teamsizes (that each game is balanced and designed for), but they both have refill, RL even bots.
The impact of even a single disconnect in DBD and games with small fixed team sizes in general, is too great to not have a leaver penalty system, even in casual queue. Otherwise those games won't ever work or suvive in the long run.
Subjective opinion about griefing sounds a bit funny ngl
And it's more about showing an attitude of a certain % of dbd's community than "putting words in smn's mouth". Some don't care, some support it and some time after it snowballs into DCs/hook suicides every 3rd game. In any other game such behaviour would have been condemned but here we are.
They get their penalty. Hook suiciders and griefers don't.
I agree with you. I wish there was a way to forfeit a match as the killer. I have so many matches where I know I'm going to lose and there is no way I'm going to kill someone but Im forced to wait out an unwinnable match till all the gens are done. I had this idea a while back for a way they could let the killer leave a match and take an L. It works kinda like how old hatched worked where I killer size door opens in the basement when 3 gen has competed. Only the killer can use the door and if they do they take L and all the surviving survivors escape the match alive. This way the killer doesn't have to suffer/waste time in a match they know they going to lose and can just move on to the next.
When Im losing as killer I just want to move on to the next match as fast as possible. I dont want to continue to chase survivors who are clearly better than me and I do not want to have to wait for the whole match just to see survivors tea bag me at the gates and say "gg ez" I know someone said they empathize with Survivors but I know I don't. For every nice survivor I have seen, I have seen 10 toxic ones. Sorry, I will never feel sorry for survivors.
I mean, it is.
How do differentiate griefing from just being bad? How do you differentiate unintentional from intentional?
I started playing the game in 2018. I "grew up" with this sort of thing being extremely common. I just genuinely do not care enough to be worked up over it. Do I think you should DC, grief people or suicide on hook for no reason? No. Do I care a lot? Also no.
It used to not have a penalty in siege, at least when I played iirc. That was also a long time ago.
Using a mechanic that Is within the game rules isn't griefing.
What mechanic are you talking about? Dropping a pallet nearby your teammate and vaulting several times so killer could find survivors? Or intentionally running to the killer so they can kill them on hook?
This is symptomatic of game health, and shouldn't be seen as anything more.
Ada is protesting the game's design. You can enlighten yourself by reading up on Ebert's Model of Escalation, Conflict Escalation, and the various studies that understand why protests turn violent.
There is nothing entitled about this behavior.
on the contrary it's a video game and if she doesn't like the direction of the game she can go play a different game.
Well, I can, you know, watch what they're doing. We spawn together, sit on the gen, they hear Nurse's screech, immediately leave gen and run to her just to get hooked. Another match, someone gets downed, hooked, I unhook them, they just tbag, refuse to heal and run around the hook waiting for the killer to come. These are just several examples of the games I constantly get in solo q.
I'll just wait for report system overhaul and I hope that they'll finally address this bs. If not...well, then screw this game.
She can always uninstall and, thus, lower the playercount and stop funding BHVR by buying DLCs. That must be the definition of the protest?
Clearly she enjoys most of the game, otherwise she wouldn't have committed so much time to it (P100).
Asking someone to "go play something else" because they take issue with any part of the game is like telling Rosa Parks to take a taxi instead of the bus. That's like telling an American to move to Canada because they don't like US Healthcare. That's like telling someone to find a country that supports same-sex marriage instead of pushing their own government to legalize it. That's like telling someone to get a divorce because they've recently been fighting with their spouse.
When you become invested in any person, place, or thing, you commit to seeing it change for the better. If you walk away from something you once adored, be it a marriage, a friendship, a nation, a video game, etc., simply because "you no longer enjoy the direction it is heading," you are doing a great disservice to yourself and all involved.
Yeah, you'll definitely make the game better or influence changes by doing what Ada did. Undoubtedly. Surely. Unquestionably.
This game ain’t competitive
It's literally just a video game. If the video game is too much for someone to handle, then they should go play something. No one is forcing you to play DBD and ruin other's experiences, because you want to be a baby.
And comparing a video game to the civil rights movement is in complete bad taste.
Just because it is a video game doesn't invalidate the principle they're expressing.
The person isn't saying the situations are comparable, they're using a very easy and widely known example to illustrate the essence of the principle they're putting forward. Instead of focusing on the argument they're putting forward, you're deciding to attack examples that apply in different areas to make it easier to understand. You're purposefully ignoring the other examples, are they also in bad taste? You didn't address those. This is teetering on bad faith.
@KayTwoAyy I think you express yourself very well and I agree with what you're putting forward. I wasn't able to convey it as well before.
You're not being oppressed because you happen to face things you don't like in a pvp game. Comparing it to protests against actual oppression is a very tone deaf and shows a very limited knowledge about the world around you.
There's plenty of pvp games out there. If you find yourself constantly giving up in games and not having fun, then go find a different game to play. This "act of protest" is only hurting those who actually want to play the game and all you are doing is making yourself look like a child who can't handle any sort of conflict.
Nobody is talking about oppression. Just because it's the main subject of ONE example, doesn't mean a similar principle that applies to it must consequently apply to only subjects revolving around oppression. Obviously nobody is being actually oppressed in a video game. All you're doing here is beating a strawman at this point to disregard the main argument.
While I don't disagree that people who give up that early are little whining turds, they're in their right to play and Kay explained in a concise manner why it isn't correct to call it entitled. Until BHVR makes a hard stance on this, they're not breaking any rules. Yeah, it sucks, just as it sucks that there are strikes in essential areas of my country every week which make my day suck more. It's how it is and I understand it, even if I don't like it.
At the end of the day, BHVR never tried to really punish these people so they clearly don't agree with your perspective. And that's the company that told people to go play Civ.
You are talking about oppression the minute you bring up the civil rights movement as a comparison. Did you not pay attention to history class?
??? Are you trying to bait??? Is this also a discussion about universal healthcare too? Or the right to strike and unionize? (since I've given that example too)
It's like you stopped at the very first sentence I wrote and are acting purposely daft to the actual argument being made.
Did you not read the post I responded to? Because that's the only you can pretend to not know that I was responding specifically about him comparing rage quitting in a video game to the civils right movement.
At this point, I'm not responding any further because it's clear you aren't interested in defending the point, just making attacks.
I addressed this in my first reply to you, you just chose to ignore it to re-enforce a point I dedicated a paragraph to. This became circular because you were incapable of addressing the actual idea Kay was presenting and instead used their example involving the civil rights movements as a strawman you repeatedly beat to death.
I'm seeing a trend with using alarmist terms and themes as bases for arguments. I haven't seen this much bad faith in a while.
Sure, Ada's behaviour will certainly change game for the better or will definitely influence some positive changes
I hope this comment finally gets through because I wasn't able to send it several times lol
You're downplaying the significance of video games in daily life for the sake of your argument. The statement "it's just a video game" is wildly out of touch.
If we assume gamers age 26-55 are working 8 hours a day and sleeping 8 hours a night, we can see that a significant portion of the gamer population (US/UK) is spending most of their free time playing video games. Not to mention the fact that someone who is P100 most likely falls in the 24+ hours per week group--to this party, video games ARE their life.
If you can't empathize with someone who wants to improve the quality of their life, then you're just apathetic and that is the end of this conversation.
If I don't like PUBG, I can try Fortnite. If I don't like Fortnite, I can try Warzone. If I don't like Warzone, I can try Apex Legends.
If I don't like Valorant, I can try CSGO. If I don't like CSGO, I can try COD Search & Destroy. If I don't like S&D, I can try R6: Siege.
If I don't like Overwatch, I can try Paladins. If I don't like Paladins, I can try Team Fortress 2.
If I don't like League of Legends, I can try DOTA 2. If I don't like DOTA 2, I can try HotS. If I don't like HotS, I can try Smite.
If I don't like Dead by Daylight, I can try...? Nothing.
There is currently nothing comparable to DBD worth playing. Do you not see how that invalidates your "go play something else" suggestion? If they were interested in playing something else, they would have moved on long ago. They are looking for something like DBD, but they can't find it, so they are doing what they can to improve the game in front of them.
BHVR has ignored the community and it's content creators on several issues for years now. This individual does not feel like their voice is being heard, so they are taking action in-game (be it conciously or sub-conciously) to let the developers know that they need to make a change.
Perhaps you don't like that I've placed you on the wrong side of history, with my civil rights analogy. Or perhaps the analogy was completely lost on you. Either way, let me rephrase in a way you should understand:
Walking away from problems = cringe
Standing for change = goated
Ada stands for change, therefore Ada is the GOAT.
I assume this is sarcasm, so I'm just replying to let you know that the comment finally went thru (:
So I think this is more of a problem with parenting. When you play any game online, you are bound to play with children who have way too much time to play video games. Their parents don't parent them, they leave their kids to play video games while they go do who knows what. It's sad, but it's reality.
The best thing that can happen to improve the community for everyone is to ban these children. Permanently. If they want to use Mom and Dad's credit card to buy another copy, go ahead. Mom and Dad can enjoy the consequences of their failed parenting.
LOL
What a ridiculous take in literally every facet.
This thread is fire.
😂
Yeah, a dumpster fire of poor arguments. I had no idea I'd be kicking the hornet's nest when making this thread.
Later I'll be creating a massive complication of all of the counter-arguments in this thread and the problems with many of them. If I don't die from a brain haemorrhage in the process, it should be up later today.
Yeah, with such a behaviour Ada will surely, undoubtedly, certainly change the game for better or influence some important changes.
One person decided to spoil the game for the rest of their 3 teammates just because they didn’t like the Killer and people are still going back and forth on this?
I’m sure those 3 teammates would prefer that Ada to not even play the game than waste everyone’s time like this. No one cares if that Ada is making a point or not, all they care is that Ada just wasted their time for no good reason.
Get a medkit ready
Survivors will DC, AFK & rage quit for anything. It doesn't matter what you do there will always be some salty player that has some excuse or hates a certain killer. Pinhead definitely seems to be my worst killer for early DCs.
Earlier this evening I had a team of 3 DC at the same time because I was playing Oni. Apparently he is the sweatiest of killers and warrants 3 DCs and then toxic endgame chat.
Funny thing is that was like the 2nd time I've played Oni on PC and had a mixture of yellow and green perks equipped.
Ada is the symptom of a bigger problem.
That is what this conversation boils down to. I'm sure someone here will be more than thrilled to remark on what an over-dramatic analogy I'm making, but that is 1:1 what is going on right now in DBD. The game is dying because of a few core flaws, and up until now BHVR has only attempted to treat it's symptoms.
The game is hardly dying and people being babies and rage quitting while playing the game are doing nothing but hurting people just trying to play the game.
If people really believe that the game has some fundamental issue the devs aren't addressing, then stop playing. Rage quitting matches still counts for active player count. Not playing reduces the player count.
Safe to assume you've no substantial rebuttle to my earlier comment then? Okay.
Let me just provide the nth argument to this discussion real quick, so you can totally ignore all the other valid points brought forth, and take another shot at invalidating an attempt to help you understand a point of view you seem willfully ignorant towards.
The longer BHVR leaves core issues in the game, the more likely the following two actions are to take place:
1) Players leave DBD for other things.
2) Players continue to rage quit in protest of features they disagree with/do not enjoy.
If the former occurs, well what do you know, the game dies. If the latter occurs, it results in an increase of player frustration AND eventually those players leave.
Right, so tell me again how the game ISN'T dying if these issues continue to go unchecked?
Players leaving the game does LESS for game health than players rage quitting. Why? Because ragequitters tell the developers WHERE the problem is. When people leave, the developers have no data to indicate why people are not enjoying their game. At least rage quitters are pointing BHVR straight towards the problem.
The game isn't dying, because the daily active playerbase is stable. If the game was truly dying, the player base would be falling but it is not.
People who throw a fit because things don't go the way they want in a pvp game, simply need to find a different game. Ruining matches for people who actually want to play isn't the statement you think it is.
Ruining matches for people who actually want to play isn't the statement you think it is.
And yet the problem will continue to persist until the reasons these players are rage quitting is addressed. At which point, that must mean that rage quitters ARE making a statement, no? Or do we just continue to ignore them until the game dies because no one enjoys playing a game where someone quits every match?
Are we supposed to just close our eyes and wish the rage quitters away? Is that your proposal?
The game isn't dying, because the daily active playerbase is stable.
This is DBD from May 2016 to June 2021 (Upward Trend)
This is DBD from June 2021 to Present (Downward Trend)