"You can't force people to play the game" When did this become so popular of a saying?

Seriously, ever since the bots were released, I have heard so many players parroting this.

I admit, the game has unfun issues, things that need to be addressed. Things that are unfun to play against.

But when did everyone decide that it suddenly okay to DC? Why is Dead by Daylight the only game I know that this has apparently become okay?

Seriously, I don't care about forcing people to stay in the game, but it is normal in pretty much every other team based game that isn't free for all with back-fill to punish and decentivise people leaving their matches constantly.

Nobody forces you to stay, but its expected you will be hit with penalties for doing it frequently. These games also have unfun things. I don't like getting instantly sniped out of spawn, or dying to a grenade I never saw.

Again, I understand that the game is unfun at times, but I had a teammate literally kill themselves on hook because they get gen grabbed by a pig. "You can't force him to play the game" Yeah but the devs with the leaver penalty can at least prevent him from immediately queueing into another match where he is free to screw his team out as soon as his ego is bruised.

Tagged: Mod

Comments

  • @[Deleted User] said:

    I'm actually seeing less DCs since the bots. Not sure why.

    More suicides began once they announced bots. Strange that.

    So half the time you won't even get a bot that would have been more productive anyway than a great deal of players are.

  • @FilthyLegionRevival said:

    https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3515802#Comment_3515802

    Well look at you, Mr. My internet is so consistent. It isn't just for the sake of being angry. Some of us genuinely have bad connections where we live. That mean we're just supposed to ######### off?

    If you have a bad connection, yes. You're playing a Multiplayer game with a bad ping/connection and YOU'RE the ONE to ask this question?

    Yeah how dare people want teammates with stable internet and not dial-up/wifi connections. The nerve.

  • @Mr_K said:

    https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3517069#Comment_3517069

    So you want the entire system to be around the poorest connection possible? No, that's not how the world works. You may be legit but there are thousands that want to DC without penalty on demand. From my original post, other PvP games are stricter than BHVR in this regard. Other games will ban your account for doing what a lot of dbd players are doing.

    I'm not saying bhvr should adopt these policies. I'm saying that some punishment is required for quiters for the health of the game.

    No. I do not want it to be centred around that. I'm just saying we got bot survivors so is there really any point to having this? People are gonna give up on hook to dodge the penalty, making bots unable to be used therefore making the change useless. I'll quit preaching the idea once killer bots are a thing in custom. Not just the tutorial. I love this game with all my heart.

  • @knell said:

    https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3517021#Comment_3517021

    Your "compromise" is simply yielding to the whims of children who are the type to throw tantrums at the drop of a hat. We actually don't want those types of people polluting majority of the matches because they are ultimately detrimental to this game. We want them gone. Personally I rather have a much smaller population of quality adults (at least emotionally and mentally) to play with. And the children need to learn that if they are that unhappy with the game to the point of quitting frequently in middle of matches, they need to move on to other games. That would be a win-win for everyone.

    Moreover, this is first and foremost an online multi-player game. People are here to play with other people, and bots will never be able to replace that. It won't matter how good the bots become, or how awful the other players play.

    Ooooookay

  • @solarjin1 said:

    i don't care what excuse these players give... it will never be ok to ######### over your team.

    It certainly is okay in some situations. If my "team" never so much as looks in the direction of a gen in the first 5 minutes and is instead off trading hooks and trying (i.e. failing) for flashlight saves I see nothing wrong with bowing out. If they aren't going to put in some effort to progress the match, I'm under no obligation to stick around and help them lose slower. Making moral absolutist statements about a mostly gray situation is pretty silly. There are situations where they're obviously wrong, like going down 20 seconds in and trying to suicide immediately. However, in my experience that's fairly rare. I actually see DC's more often, oddly enough. I guess if they're "that type" they're more likely to take the quick twitch reaction of hitting "Leave Game" than wait until they're on hook to decide.

    P.S. Apparently censored posts get uncensored in the reply box when you quote them. Weird.

  • @ExcelSword said:

    https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3516596#Comment_3516596

    What I meant was when was it okay to defend a person DCing just because they got their egos bruised.

    I don't want to force people to play the game. If they got tilted, I would rather they take a break. If they have a family emergency, I would rather they go and make sure that is addressed. Nobody minds the DC penalty in those situations, bc IRL situations are more important.

    What is baffling is people leaving at the drop of the hat because they got outplayed, and then immediately re-queuing, and if I discuss this outside of the forums, everyone immediately comes to that person's defence with "you can't force them to play the game".

    EDIT: Seriously, go visit reddit or twitter. So many people arguing to remove the DC penalty so they can leave whenever they want.

    So we again are faced with 3 options:

    1) Ban people for hook suicide and multiple DCs which over time will lead to a smaller and smaller playerbase and longer cues and more frustration.

    2) Keep DC penalties where they are and continue to deal with hook opt outs to avoid penalties.

    3) Remove DC penalties and no match will finish without multiple bots.


    Or... do something to fix why people DC. Better MMR which will mean longer cue times but games will be more balanced. Remove tunneling and camping. Drop the ability to stack gen repair speed perks and items.

    Short of fixing the greater cause of why people leave a match (I don't see it as "entitlement", I see it as customers saying this isn't fun) there isn't much else to do that doesn't create more problems.

  • @OogieBoogie said:

    https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3515612#Comment_3515612

    It certainly is okay in some situations. If my "team" never so much as looks in the direction of a gen in the first 5 minutes and is instead off trading hooks and trying (i.e. failing) for flashlight saves I see nothing wrong with bowing out. If they aren't going to put in some effort to progress the match, I'm under no obligation to stick around and help them lose slower. Making moral absolutist statements about a mostly gray situation is pretty silly. There are situations where they're obviously wrong, like going down 20 seconds in and trying to suicide immediately. However, in my experience that's fairly rare. I actually see DC's more often, oddly enough. I guess if they're "that type" they're more likely to take the quick twitch reaction of hitting "Leave Game" than wait until they're on hook to decide.

    P.S. Apparently censored posts get uncensored in the reply box when you quote them. Weird.

    fair enough. If the team look completely hopeless and your 5nins in i could understand that a bit more.

  • The thing is that the game is so big with so many different things .... and four out of five people have not the slightest clue what they will go up against. Chances are that, if you don't love every single killer, every single strategy and every single type of character you come accross ... there will be matches that you absolutely hate because of things outside of your control (aka who and what you get matched against)

  • Most of the games I play you can leave without penalty unless it is a ranked game mode.

  • @GoodBoyKaru said:

    Is it okay? No. But is it true? Yes.

    If someone has decided, "Nope, I'm not playing this", you cannot force them to. They will go around sandbagging, DC, unalive on hook, or just alt tab AFK and do something else. People will always act like petulant children and throw their toys out the pram the moment they feel a whif of some minor inconvenience, so the best thing to do is to take this into account when designing game systems to screw over everyone else as little as possible.

    This argument is bad. Because, yes, yes you can force them. By banning them if they do it. Pretty simple, and will end this entitled behavior very quickly. Most other games already do this.

  • "you can't force someone to play a video game"

    Yes true but also nobody made them log in either, they made choices and then decided they didn't like the consequences. ######### is goofy af.

  • @FilthyLegionRevival said:

    https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3517076#Comment_3517076

    No. I do not want it to be centred around that. I'm just saying we got bot survivors so is there really any point to having this? People are gonna give up on hook to dodge the penalty, making bots unable to be used therefore making the change useless. I'll quit preaching the idea once killer bots are a thing in custom. Not just the tutorial. I love this game with all my heart.

    I'm serious, I can't get the event challenges done because of being constantly booted and the penalty punishing me for being poor I'm actually having a ######### mental breakdown. I just want the last piece of this stupid jake cosmetic.

  • @[Deleted User] said:

    https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3516665#Comment_3516665

    The issue is it can be hard to know if someone is doing it intentionally. Sure, people will say "Well that's obvious" but it's not unless you can mind read. From what I've seen devs write on this forum it seems they don't want to go down the rabbit hole of trying to interpret players intentions. This is why I doubt we will see bans for such actions. Personally, I think that's a good thing.

    Exactly.

    I work from home, but also have a 8 month old son. He plays next to me while I work, and I'm there for him the second he needs something. If he wakes up in the middle of the match crying because he is hungry, do you think I'm just going to let him scream until the game is over? Nope. I'm immediately getting up and making him a bottle. It doesn't matter if I'm playing Survivor or Killer.

    If you want there to be an AFK timer and then the player is hit / gets a DC penalty, i get that. Flat out asking for a ban? That's nonsense. Even in games with ranked mode (such as Overwatch), you would lose 50 SR and get a 5 minute ban from Competitive Matchmaking.

  • If DBD was a party game, then yes feel free to DC since bots will fill the slot. However BHVR in their quest to pander to everyone for the largest share of the pie doesn’t want to define what DBD is supposed to be.

    Adding bots without doing more about DCs/suicides is what a party game would be like because not much is at stake.

    But when you have BHVR also endorsing DBD as a competitive game via community cups, they send a lot of mixed signals.

    This results in everyone applying their idea of what DBD is supposed to be into their logic and arguing around it.

    You have some people arguing, “Think of the casuals. Friends shouldn’t be punished playing together. The amount of people playing competitively in public games is a very small percentage. ”

    On the other hand, there are people maintaining that people who DC or suicide should be punished because they offer a disadvantage to the team even if bots exist. Both roles should be balanced based on the top 5%, win conditions etc

    Lots of discussions would go a lot smoother if there was a clear idea of what DBD is supposed to be. If DBD was a casual game, then SBMM could be removed, AI directors could be implemented to make games not feel one sided. If DBD was competitive, ingame comms could be added, the game could be balanced around Survivors and Killer instead of Swf, Killer and solo queue.

    Even the sentence “You can’t force people to play” makes sense if DBD was a party game where winning or losing didn’t matter that much. From a competitive perspective though, it makes no sense, hence here we are now with no real conclusion.

  • @Reinami said:

    https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3515759#Comment_3515759

    This argument is bad. Because, yes, yes you can force them. By banning them if they do it. Pretty simple, and will end this entitled behavior very quickly. Most other games already do this.

    The punishment system involving this will either be too harsh or too light. It's very difficult to strike up a happy medium without some trial and error first.

    How do you tell the difference between unhook attempt escapes to give hatch, or to leave the game, or for a new player who knows no better? What if someone has an emergency, but because they've DCd before due to similar situations they come back to an account ban? Or if you have spotty Internet for a day, and when it comes back you find you've got a ban for dcing. What happens when people figure out the max amount you can dc within a timeframe and do it anyway up to a point?

    This is why I say that these people should be taken into account when designing game systems (a la dc bots). Instead of investing time, money, and resources into a system that will either not ban enough or unfairly ban legitimate players, it's better to invest that time and money into other aspects of the game to ensure the other 4 players are screwed over as little as possible.

    Unfortunately, sometimes you have to cater to them in creating something, because the opportunity cost of doing otherwise is too great.

  • @GoodBoyKaru said:

    https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3517400#Comment_3517400

    The punishment system involving this will either be too harsh or too light. It's very difficult to strike up a happy medium without some trial and error first.

    How do you tell the difference between unhook attempt escapes to give hatch, or to leave the game, or for a new player who knows no better? What if someone has an emergency, but because they've DCd before due to similar situations they come back to an account ban? Or if you have spotty Internet for a day, and when it comes back you find you've got a ban for dcing. What happens when people figure out the max amount you can dc within a timeframe and do it anyway up to a point?

    This is why I say that these people should be taken into account when designing game systems (a la dc bots). Instead of investing time, money, and resources into a system that will either not ban enough or unfairly ban legitimate players, it's better to invest that time and money into other aspects of the game to ensure the other 4 players are screwed over as little as possible.

    Unfortunately, sometimes you have to cater to them in creating something, because the opportunity cost of doing otherwise is too great.

    I'd actually argue that the "hook 4% mechanic" should just be removed entirely. But obviously such a system wouldn't just look at a single time this happens just like, any other game that literally exists. It would be based on a pattern of behavior that shows that you do this consistently. If you are afking, or getting <2k bloodpoints for multiple matches, obviously something is going wrong. Even the worst players shouldn't seem like they are afk multiple games in a row.


    Additionally, you can obviously tweak such a system to take into account whether someone is new, and potentially give them more leeway.

  • @Pulsar said:

    https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3516665#Comment_3516665

    "Self-unhook, Sandbagging, afking and whatever else."

    New players will try to kobe. Some players might run a luck build.

    New players have no idea what's going on. Bad players might sandbag on accident. I've certainly sandbagged people on accident whilst trying to take a hit for them. Heck, I've sandbagged my friends on purpose because it was silly.

    Some people have this thing called real-life responsibilities. They shouldn't be banned for attending to them.

    You clearly want to ban people for not playing with you. In your hatred, you've damned many more people in this idea.

    "Other people have real life responsibilities"

    Yes and as I have said if it comes up enough to actually be punished for it you shouldn't be playing sorry. Especially with how short of games dbd has.

    Also I said consistent behavior, you mentioned things that don't happen often unless intentional.

    Luck build would obviously not impact things if self unhook was removed outside of deli.

    I don't have an emotion strong enough on this subject to actually call it hatred, just distain. That being said it's all about the survivor experience. When someone dcs or gives up in my killer lobbies I am far more frustrated for the other survivors they left behind not my own experience and when I play survivor they ruined the game for me entirely.

    Again people giving up, leaving or trolling only leads to more doing the same out of tilt. Letting people run wild like you want, even more so than is currently allowed will only hurt the game more.

    I don't think I reclarified this either, I said this penalty system wouldn't go into place until a certain hour threshold was hit. At a 100 hours you know not to kobe or the other things discussed. I'm doing nothing but a cycle hurting the player base directly.

1 2 ›