Understanding the "Go Next" epidemic: why did it exist?
Greetings, friends of the Fog! I hope this discussion finds you doing well.
By now most of us have already seen that the Go Next Prevention mechanic was killswitched after the disaster that it caused when players got punished even if they did nothing wrong.
But I think that raises the question as to why such mechanic was added in the first place. And the answer may be obvious at first: the "Go Next" epidemic and the sheer amount of games where players decide to suicide on hook.
The answer is correct, sure, but I would like to propose a deeper discussion:
What was the origin of the "Go Next" epidemic? Why did such thing ever existed in the first place, and how did it reach a level so severe that changes were made to fundamental aspects of the game?
And if I were to share my own answer, I would say it was caused by a gradual deterioration of the survivor role. Because let's think for a second about the year I started playing DBD: 2018. Back then the game simply didn't have DC penalties, one could DC as much as they wanted to, with the only punishment being rank-related (the loss of a pip, if memory serves me right). And yet, people didn't disconnect like crazy every single game.
It happened sometimes, of course, especially with OG Legion, but I wouldn't call it an epidemic of its own.
However, back then there was more to the survivor role than there currently is. They still had proper resources, they didn't have to worry about waves and waves of gen-related killer perks, stealth was still a viable playstyle, killers weren't as oppressive, and the list goes on.
But we all know that changed in more recent times. Survivors lost most of what they had available to them, and nothing was really given. They die more often, their objectives are harder to do (due to perks), and generally speaking they have a worse experience. It is a lack of everything, and it seems to me that was the primary reason for the massive increase of hook suicides.
Let me know what you think, please share your thoughts, any feedback is welcome!
Why do you think the "Go Next" epidemic existed?
Comments
We'd argue its a combination of things.
When we started around Doc we rarely saw people trying to die on hook unless it was the old "swing escape" build. We did however see more actual DCing. Usually it looked like Internet explosions but we'd say at least 1/3 (collectively between us) we're out of petty reasons. Once the DC penalty hit, THOSE survivors went the route of swinging on hook to go next and got mixed in with those swinging out of other semi reasonable reasons (ex: your hooked and the rest slugged). Its not like anyone could really stop them and it wasn't a super large number at the time. Then killers got buffed during the meta shake up and quickly followed by the eruptoverbrine era. Obviously survivors didn't want to spend an hr trying to win and would quit via swing to avoid the penalty. Fair enough, however we don't think most these people stopped quitting when met with something they didn't like. This then started a trend for certain types of players and just spread from there. Now we can't tell if it's a quit out of frustration or a quit because F you.
I left that part out because it is objectively untrue.
You say that, wait until they implement it and then this forum will be flooded with "Not enough ban slots" posts. It's going to happen.
Ok… again.
One bad chase does not equal instantaneous win for the killer. It's just objectively untrue.
Giving my answers here before reading others thoughts. There's a lot of factors, some out of BHVR's control, some they could potentially change.
1: Rage quitting - an inevitable part of games
2: The pointlessness of many games - by game design, its really hard for survivors to come back. You are at your strongest early, if that advantage is lost, the game is pointless. Many players rush to this idea way too quickly, but the core concept is true.
3: Getting 'stuck' in the game - An expansion of the pointlessness issue. I remember I was playing survivor, one survivor was dead, I was hooked on the second stage, and we still had three gens to go. I really felt like I should just go next, but I stuck it out, got rescued. Another survivor was killed, and then I got slugged for the 4k. I did the "right" thing sticking around, and the reward was even more time being stuck in the game.
There's a huge incentive to get out of the game before it gets really bad.
4: The every survivor for themselves nature. Back before the AFC feature, I remember watching basement Bubba set up with Kindred. If the survivor just stuck it out, the other three could escape, but if you're playing believing that only your escape matters then its kind of pointless.
I think first person to be hooked is an example of this. Your chance to escape goes way down as the first hook, so why not go next? You're probably just going to get tunneled anyway.
5: Wrong killer - For every killer there is some survivor that doesn't want to play them. It's perfectly understandable if you give people an out and they are put in a situation where they can leave without penalty they're going to take it.
6: Everyone else is doing it - If other people are going to quit at the slightest inconvenience, why can't I type of attitude. Especially given the point about getting trapped in the game, better to get out of a bad game as quickly as possible because that's how everyone behaves.
They already implemented the solution. Stop people from being able to unhook, though I will say they need to remove that whole caveat of "if you bring a luck thing you can give up still!" and just remove it. It completely dodges the point of the system. I have people bringing luck offerings for the first time in DBD history, JUST so they have the option to give up. Rework the perks based around luck.
But yes I do agree with your point, you can alleviate frustration for what they can control. Honestly what they need to do to alleviate the frustration is what they should've done years ago. Make multihooking the main way to win.
That is my problem with the whole anti-tunneling stuff. I don't disagree that they should add these anti-whatever systems. My problem is that while they do that, they aren't making multihooking any better. They want multihooking to be the main playstyle (both devs and the players tbh) but multihooking still sucks. They haven't made it stronger. Multihooking is still a detriment to do because they haven't fixed the main thing which is:
The game is severely survivor sided in the 4v1, but then dramatically killer sided in the 3v1, so killers will do the playstyle that secures a kill the fastest / easiest to get them into the numbers game that is killer favored. They need to close that gap. Just adding anti-tunnel, anti-camping, and anti-slugging features won't fix the main problem. It's a bandaid fix that only helps one side, when they could be making both sides feel better to play.
Very interesting points here, my friend!
-The ranks I think are an interesting case because, while I do agree with what you said here, I would also point out the fact that some people don't really care about their MMR. I think this one is closer to what @GoodBoyKaru mentioned regarding alternate win conditions such as BBQ / WGLF stacks, where you had a reason to stay in a match even if it was clear that your team wouldn't be able to win.
-As for the challenges, I think they started out fine, but they reached a point where they required things to perfectly align during a match in order to be completed. Now, I am not sure of how impactful they were when it comes to the "go next" epidemic, because the archives existed before the epidemic and, apparently, they will no longer be updated. It would be difficult to measure how frequent the DC / hook suicides were when complicated challenges were released alongside their respective rifts.
-This part about FOMO is something I've noticed a while ago. If you recall the days of Old DBD, there were longer periods of time between stuff, where you would be playing the regular game. Now it seems you barely select the regular queue. Because it is modifier after event after modifier and so on. Now, I personally like the game's events, especially Halloween and Anniversary, but the modifier streak is a little too much. Most of them aren't even fun to begin with, imo, and their FOMO rewards are really unnecessary.
-Lastly I think the idea of artificially inflating the game's kill rates is largely responsible for the problem, because the way it was done involved depriving survivors of their resources. The map reworks are the best example of this. Personally, I don't like chases, I prefer hide and seek and doing gens, but if I am going to be chased then I need resources to use. Part of the deterioration of the survivor role, in my opinion, is leaving them with very little to work with.
It is an interesting perspective, friends!
Now, I believe the gen kick meta and the supposed meta shake up (meta replacement, as I call it) from 6.1.0 indeed contributed to the deterioration of the survivor role itself. If we pair it with the map reworks that had already happened by then, it is entirely possible that these games weren't worth playing. And, as you say, the trend continues, even if some of the worst offenders (such as the gen kick meta itself and Skull Merchant's first design) were no longer around.
I’d say to wait with retrospectives like this until the measures have had some time to settle. I’m not convinced the ‘epidemic’ is over.
That is a fair point, my friend.
I just chose to do it right now because you can't really "go next" anymore. Sure, you can still DC, but that will mean having to deal with an even harsher penalty. While some people will still give up, the way it had been happening until this point is no longer possible.
I guess I’m suspecting that they’ll do a partial revert. That, or people will find a loophole and ‘go next’ that way.
That one “we saved the city” spongebob meme comes to mind.
I don't think they will revert the "no more hook suicide" aspect, tbh. The other stuff? Maybe, but I think this part specifically is gone, for now.
We’ll see, I suppose.
Either way, thanks for an interesting, if somewhat depressing read.
No problem, my dear friend, thank you for stopping by.
And I'm sorry there isn't really a positive aspect to share here.
I think they should just leave off the "go-next penalty." Just the removal of throwing on hook should be effective enough.
Reading through the discussion, I agree with what some of the others have said about games feeling hopeless shortly after the match starts. If Survivors have a bad start, there is little to no hope of turning the match around. Some kind of catch-up mechanic was explored in 2v8, which might help a little bit for 1v4. Obviously the values would have to be tweaked. The yellow herbs in the RE-edition of 2v8 were a neat idea as well. Maybe something like that could return for 1v4 (but again, limited). Or just giving Survivors one more hook state. We can increase gen repair times to compensate if need be. These are just ideas of course.
I also agreed with the point that there is little point of sticking out a match with a bad start. Or if the Killer wants to tunnel me out that badly? Fine, I'll get out. Bad and/or trolling teammates were another big reason for me to go next.
All I know is my matches were more pleasant when these people could actually leave. Now they're actively sabotaging the matches they're forced to stay in.
They're throwing down pallets, they're blowing gens up, they're running to the killer to be hooked or running StB to kill themselves faster, some are even bringing plot twist to bleed themselves out.
This is literally WORSE than if they were just allowed to F- Off
Honestly, I think reverting most of the maps and giving survivors their resources back should help. It is the route I'd go if it was up to me.
I think it is easier to work with things that we already had instead of creating something new from scratch.
Yes, that was a concern many players had: that people would intentionally sabotage the game. Though, to be fair, someone choosing to leave already ruins the match for the others who will stay.
Yes, I still think people should be allowed to "F- off" as the other person puts it. We could just chalk it up to a bad game, as we have many of those, and will continue to have many bad games going forward, no matter what kinds of mechanics are put in place.
And I'll be real, I've also had some of the most interesting matches as a result of teammates giving up as well.
And I'm curious: I wasn't around for 2018 DBD, so I'm wondering what kinds of resources Survivors have lost.
Fair enough, my friend!
Well, as for survivor resources, the most important, in my opinion, are the maps. The map reworks, pretty much all of them, made maps worse for survivors, either by removing tiles entirely or replacing them with extremely unsafe tiles that are barely useful. Coldwind maps are the worst offenders, by far.
Items and perks are also on the list, of course. Med-kits in particular received a severe nerf, which I personally don't think was needed. Perks we could name Self-Care, Balanced Landing, Adrenaline, DS losing 1 second of stun time for some reason, Spine Chill, Iron Will (this one was reverted, thankfully).
The maps take priority though. While perks and items are important, they are not always guaranteed to be there. Some players play without item, and some players do not go with the meta. But the maps are always, always there.
on occasion I’ve managed to escape in a 2v1 scenario and it’s mainly due to the teammate or I having a lucky chase being efficient on gens and the killer isn’t paying attention
Oh yeah, I have yet to see a single map that I like. Though some are definitely worse than others. For example, any match in the Forgotten Ruins is guaranteed to be a complete disaster. The number of times I've gone to second phase on my first hook on that map is staggering.
DBD is by definition a competitive game, because it uses MMR for matchmaking.
And the point is that these games aren't necessarily compettive. They are TEAMBASED games. Hell the sports games will punish people for leaving early. Every multiplayer game does this. But DBD does not. I'd bet mario kart probably does this if you leave games.
Yep, maps are really problematic when they don't provide enough resources.
Ideal map design is, in my opinion, original Chapel. No map was as balanced as that one was.
I don't think so, tbh.
In DBD you can't even see your own MMR. The system is widely disliked, it was never requested in the first place, and many players don't care about it. The so-called "comp" scene is external, filled with restrictions that regular games do not have, and don't reflect a normal DBD match.
The Go Next epidemic became what it was because back then someone could pull the sickest comeback out of a single play and nowadays you know the result of the match within the first 30 seconds.
No one wants to stay on a match several minutes long when they know they lost within the first 30 seconds of the match. That's why the people that disconnect are survivors and very specifically full hex build killer players. Any other killer can pull a 0 to 4k at any point if they're smart enough, so they just endure until it happens (even if it ends up not happening), but full hex builds becoming perkless builds right at the start makes people quit because that chance of a comeback gets severely reduced.
So, yeah, same reason survivors started to "Go next". There was just no reason to play.
The old ranks not only could you see the ranks but to stay in the red/purple as survivor you had to do things to be useful to the team, there was reason to care. With their SBMM it makes sense people don't care what their MMR is when it's all hidden and the matchmaking itself doesn't feel rewarding.
I agree with GoodboyKaru, they've removed alot of the incentives for survivors to stay in a match and for both sides to play in a more fun way. I think it's one of the unfortunate effects of putting the focus more on balancing based on 60/40 kill rate, making it more competitive, and not considering the fun factor.
I think of before the modifiers and rift people would say how by Lunar New Year event they would start feeling burnt out but then it felt like not much happened between Lunar New Year and Anniversary so that would be time people would take a break. There was a time people could reset if they needed to without missing out.
Survivors used to have alot more agency in a match which allowed for more playstyles. Since 6.1.0 they've removed alot from survivors agency to hit and keep that 60/40 kill rate and have pushed survivors more and more to gen focused gameplay - so much so that if you do anything aside from gen rush it feels like you're throwing the game. I liked being able have a mix of stealth and chase, adjusting based on the match, but they've really killed the stealth gameplay and like you said with chases they have removed resources survivors could work with.
I believe the root is gambling addiction. Players have had it good before and have decided that the one time the stars aligned for them should have been the standard. So they quit early, rolling the dice yet again, hoping that maybe the next time the stars will align. Surely the next game will have the correct map. And the fun killer. And the best teammates. And the strongest perks. And the best spawns. On and on and on.
Comeback potential for survivors has been greatly reduced, I agree. When compared to Old DBD, it is way harder to recover from a bad start these days.
Yep, all good points, my friend!
My point is that. The devs obviously care that people are "matched" accordingly based on skill. That by definition means that the game is competitive. DBD is not a party game.
Let me ask you this.
Do you think Mario Party, or Mario Kart match players together with a hidden MMR? Or do you think that they just throw together the first few people with decent ping together?
I consider it a horror-themed party game, most certainly. MMR doesn't exist to create a competitive scene, it just exists to replace (and do a much worse job btw) the old rank system.
Genuinely no idea, haven't played the on-line multiplayer of these games in almost ten years.
Personally, in my own experience, matchmaking is the cause of a lot of the game's problems. Whether that means lobbies of wildly varying skill levels or players with very different expectations (one survivor wants to meme, one survivor wants to play super comp style, one survivor wants to do get their generator quest done, one survivor's friend just got them into the game and everything is exciting and spooky and they want to play hide and seek, and the killer just wants to try out some niche build)… it's a casual game, so yeah, you're going to have players who want very different things from their matches; it'd be nice if the game could somehow group like with like, but that might be impossible. However, the game should damn well be able to group together people of similar skill levels. Plus, skill levels and playstyles are going to have some overlap. New players should go against new players. Casual survivors are probably going to do gens but not last too long in chase, and they'll have the best time against a killer who likes to 8-hook or test out weird builds. Survivors who like to play hide-and-seek and never touch gens would be great put together in one lobby against a killer who's bad at pressuring gens. BHVR wants to try to program a system that can properly determine crow spawn rate depending on an infinite number of possible scenarios, why not look for patterns in emblem scores that would help put together lobbies with less friction.
The "go next" epidemic was probably at least partially caused by a lot of misery across a lot of matches that built up until it reached a critical point where something small could feel monumental. Every stubbed toe became an omen of nuclear disaster. The fact that this happened to such a large number of players says there are big problems that aren't being addressed. A game that survives in large part because of an addictive grind and the sunk cost fallacy may retain long-term players who feel compelled to try to play, but their frustrations just build and build, the bright spots are few and far between, and so they "go next" because the game doesn't really reward them for trying their best so why should they try? If they felt like their efforts were rewarded, then they'd expend the effort. To add to this, the dopamine rushes in DbD don't come from working on gens, they come from moments when the stars align or breath-holding stealth pays off or some crazy Hail Mary actually works for once.
Yeah, I know, there's probably a lot of problems with what I just said, especially in terms of implementing anything from my impossible wishlist in that first paragraph. It's late. I think the big takeaway from my post is I hate DbD's matchmaking. I'm not sure my second paragraph even makes sense.
Edit: Here's an old post I wrote that's kinda in a similar vein to my disjointed second paragraph, though it's more about how DbD's focus on escapes above all else has hurt the survivor experience: "The DC epidemic…" Also, "the game doesn't do a good job of rewarding participation." I could swear I wrote a post that was basically a coherent version of that paragraph, but maybe I'm imagining it.
Edit 2: Solo queue survivors don't believe their teammates will help them when things get tough. Another reason an issue such as "going next" is widespread is that frustration is like a virus, and in a single match one player can spread it to four others.
Honestly, just burn out pure and simple. The core gameplay loop hasn't meaningfully changed in 9 years. People are just bored and wanna cherry pick matches where they know that they're gonna have fun in.
I don't think that's true.
You can't isolate a singular game and declare that whatever reason the survivor ostensibly might've had to quit is the -only- contributing factor. People don't go into these matches with a clean slate, they do carry baggage from prior games.
If you have three bad matches in a row and you get found and hooked first on your fourth match, it's going to feel a LOT different than if you have three good matches in a row and the same thing happens. It doesn't even have to be something that happens within the game, either. Stressors weighing on your mind in real life can impact the way you interact with games.
In that regard, I don't think it's unreasonable to state that a deteriorating survivor experience is a contributing factor, and I don't think that people quitting out of matches that would be good enough under normal circumstances is solid evidence against it.
I think it's more a question of what you reasonably can and can't control in terms of human behavior. Ultimately, BHVR develops the game, but they absolutely MUST accept that there are limits on their ability to control player behavior. Players will come up with strategies to play the game and have fun. Players might not even care about winning or BP or whatever. People might play because it's fun. As a Killer, I've lost plenty of times and still had fun.
It's true that this game is toxic. Additionally, if this game wasn't toxic, in a fun and charming way, I wouldn't be playing it. It would just be another copy-and-paste arena game. The developers literally cannot fix this. If they do, they won't have a game anymore.
Going next is those players decision to "stop playing", so they're already doing what you suggest. They stop playing because the game is designed reward killers for low skill cheese tactics, while expecting survivors to be a 4 man squad of pro level loopers using 3rd party applications just to escape a killer that has far less experience and skill than they do.
Going next is those players decision to "stop playing", so they're already doing what you suggest. They stop playing because the game is designed reward killers for low skill cheese tactics, while expecting survivors to be a 4 man squad of pro level loopers using 3rd party applications just to escape a killer that has far less experience and skill than they do.
The answer is quite simple. People suicide in DBD because they consider the match is not worth playing. Players don't consider it worth playing because killers have been buffed to such a degree that the challenge level typically far exceeds the reward for the survivor player.
In 2016-2020 when I was a new player, terrible at looping and lacked game knowledge, I found the game quite difficult as survivor. I was not abusing infinites or other exploits because I was simply unaware they existed. Nowadays, survivor must be completely unplayable for new players. Solo Q is barely playable for veteran survivors at this point. It's pretty comical that 4 man SWF teams with thousands of hours experience per member, sweating as hard as they can with 3rd party comms and Reshade filters, routinely get 4K steamrolled by a Nurse, Spirit, or Blight with under 500 hours.
I feel the best balance period was between 2020-2022, before the huge meta shift with 6.1 update. Ever since 6.1, survivor role has just been steadily going downhill with solo Q being less and less worth playing, unless you're a masochist. And I must be because I exclusively play solo Q, because the idea of sweating on comms with a SWF like its CS GO completely ruins the atmosphere of DBD for me. The pendulum has swung from survivor-sided to heavily killer-sided instead of just resting in the middle. Now killer queues are super long while survivors are bribed with blood points to endure misery from killers that all too often use the "power role" to be toxic and BM a survivor who outplayed them but inevitably got caught once the weak links were removed with tunneling/proxy camping/slugging.
I've uninstalled this game so many times post 6.1 due to its unplayability as survivor. I never used to do this. I never used to go-next either but it reached a point where it was completely pointless to stay in certain matches due to how hilariously broken some killer's abilities are. Which is a shame, because the game itself is super fun when the match is actually balanced. But because matchmaking doesn't work and really poor balancing decisions have been made post 6.1 update, these close matches are the exception, not the norm.
Mario Kart does, actually. It’s not even hidden either.
Finally this topic gets some recognition. I was vocal about this a while back, but didnt catch enough people to talk abou it.
We definitely need to fix things that CAUSE people to give up, instead of punishing them (which we do now).
We need:
This system would be a great information system aswell, if majority of plalyerbase are banning blight then this killer needs to be looked at, adjusted.
I hope the devs see the discussion and take action based on what people say here, we make some good points here.
So then again… stop playing. Don't play a game you don't enjoy and ruin it for the rest of the people who actually still want to play.
Hey man with the way you talk the only thing I can tell you is get better and hope you understand because I can already tell, you're too far gone in whatever mentality you've adopted.
And no… leaving mid game and ruining the experience for others is not the same as not playing at all and letting people who actually enjoy the game, to play without your quitter mentality.
Sure, but people don't just quit. Games like this can become a habit, and people wind up fishing for that one good game among many because they don't have anything else to fill the gap. MOBAs are especially bad for this, it's where the whole 'no one likes League of Legends, especially LoL players' meme comes from.
Imo I think the survivor role in general has become pretty frustrating. Combine that with alot of killers with unfun designs and the camping/tunneling meta and it's really not surprising.
That doesn't change that they SHOULD stop playing and we should stop defending people who quit. If you do not enjoy the game you are trying to play and instead you are ruining the experience for everyone else.
STOP PLAYING. This not debatable. This is not some hot take. You do not ruin the experience for others and then act like what you say matters. I don't care why you DC'd, stop playing the game if you're upset and can't handle the things that happen in the game. And let people actually play the game who CAN handle what happens in it and who actually want to enjoy their time playing without babies giving up instantly because rando #243 tunnel'd them last game.
It's not the problem of your next match's players to deal with your displeasure of how your games go. That is genuinely child like mentality.
All PvP games are competitive by design or by the players. You cannot place two sides against eachother and dismis the human nature to make it a competition.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casual_game
Well atleast according to wikipedia, dbd isnt casual like cookie clicker or bejeweld lol. And survivors are way to angry after getting killed to be actually playing the game "casually"
I would say making the match a 3v1 is sabotaging the match and that's from a killer mains persective.
But you do point out how petty these types are. How does throwing down every pallet and blowing up every gen hurt the killer? Clearly it is meant to hurt you, the teammate, in hopes they go to the forums and advocate for them to quit on a whim.
I believe the game is better off without quiters and griefers.
Do me a favour and read the title of the topic, please.
And then leave it, if you're going to be this utterly unhelpful.
I feel like a large part of ppl not DCing in 2v8 is because its not around long enough to get sick of it. That being said, this past 2v8, I saw essentially entire lobbies DC the moment they saw deep wound bars one after another telling them it was a legion, lol.
"Learn nothing, nothing can be fixed, if you don't like it just leave."
What a healthy outlook.
Although, since BHVR seems to be taking the punish them message to heart, I suspect this attitude of yours would change dramatically if they applied this same mentality to literally anything in phase 2.
That's actually not what I said.
Please don't misquote me again.
I agree.
And, based on my experience, I believe the deterioration of the survivor role increases the level of frustration players have and can potentially build up if they get several bad games in a row. Because you, as a survivor, are far more likely to get a bad game these days than you were in the past.
Yep, I don't think it is unreasonable to say that the situation is the same, but the roles are reversed.
In my opinion DBD followed a path of being survivor sided in the very beginning, then relatively balanced, then more killer sided in recent years. Both of these extremes create problems for the other role, the only difference is that survivors could quit more often than killers because they had a way to bypass the penalty, while killers don't.
Yes, I agree, old friend.