Do You Agree With The Developer's Method's For Creating Killers?
For those who don't know, they openly explained how they want to make fun killers over good killers. Do you think this is a good method?
For those who don't know, they openly explained how they want to make fun killers over good killers. Do you think this is a good method?
Read THIS post.
Tldr: This is an archived version of the DBD forum, it has all posts, comments and media. The archived data will be published at the end of October. This site is not in any way affiliated with or endorsed by Behaviour Interactive.
Comments
No and this should be common sense.
Also, creating a fun killer does not mean that he cant be good aswell.
In theory it should be. Since any fun killer can be a good killer since power comes down to mathematics, while not any good killer can be a fun killer.
The issue is when you make a killer to be fun and then forget to tweak the numbers so that they are good like what happened with legion.
Or if you only make it fun for a very narrow subset of the playerbase... again like the legion.
Basically any killer should be A: Enjoyable to play against and B: Can be enjoyable to play AS. If it isn't fun for ANYONE to play as or if people won't have fun against them then it is fundamentally bad. So long as it meets those 2 requirements there will always be some sort of change to make them a great killer for the game.
btw. The reason a Killer needs to be fun for everyone to play against but only needs to be fun for SOMEONE to play AS is because you can chose who you play as but you can't chose who you play against. Someone's preferred playstyle will influence what killers they will like so it is good to have variety so there will be something for everyone. However counterplaying a killer needs to have a wide appeal as ALL survivors will have to deal with every single killer at some point regardless of playstyle
You can create a fun and strong killer, but it's too hard due to the few mechanics the game has.
If we had more objectives, game modes or stuff like that Im sure the devs would come out with killer powers that'd be fun and strong.
I've enjoyed Hillbilly for a long time now.
Not for his scores, but for how he plays.
And he's generally considered in the top 3 or 5.
Well, the pedant in me will ask, "how do the devs know a killer will be perceived as 'fun' by the playerbase?". I just think 'fun' is way to vague a concept to be useful in guiding a game development.
I think if they provide enough viable varieties, players will find one of them fun sooner or later. But to start development with "let's make something fun" just sounds weird to me.
I know right?
They said that the legion was not that strong but fun. However, almost nobody likes to play as him or against him. Sure there are some people who love them but the majority seems to dislike them a lot. Look at steamcharts for example.
https://steamcharts.com/app/381210
June was the Clown, September was the Spirit, and November was the legion. See the difference?
Fun is subjective and there is no way for us to know if people are going to enjoy a killer or not. We should focus on creating viable strong killers, fun comes with it.
Yes! I play for fun, and I think this games sense.
If we HAVE to pick ONE. Then yes. I'd rather that than a op killer nobody wants to play.
Also considering the game is not competetive, and there is no real rank system, I'd take fun killers over good ones. We have killers that are top tier if that's what you want. And while I wouldnt mind more, I dont want them if they're absolutely no fun to play as or against.
However, in a perfect world, and I'm sure in their minds as well, we can have both. But out of context and if having to pick one or the other, I absolutely agree with it.
I am conflicted on this one. I do think that all killers should be fun to use, but if they are weak why would you use them? Same goes the other way. If all killers are strong but unfun to play who would want to play killer?
Ok, never mind. By writing that statement I just came to the conclusion that having fun killers is more important than having strong killers.
If killers are not fun very few will want to play killer, if only a dozen of players play killer there would be even worst lobby waiting times, worse waiting times equal more survivors leaving the game, the game would get to a point were the player base is extremely low, the few playing killer will be extremely good so new, casual players will try killer, find it not enjoyable, go try survivor, wait for a while, finally get into a match, get absolutely destroyed by the veteran killer, since they keep getting destroyed they won't have fun even as survivor, some might stay and endure but most would leave.
Essentially if they had made all killers super strong the game would have been dead for a while and we wouldn't be getting the dedicated servers this summer.
Fun Game=Successful Game.
@Master Spirit is a good example of that.
I love Freddy and he is the most under powered but fun killer in game. Fun and challenging games beat easy-mode crutch fests all day every day.
Yes, fun killers are needed. Legion is fun to play as, his lack of success can kill said fun. Legion would be more fun to play against if there were more interactions possible with Deep Wound. I don't feel either way about Legion on the survivor's side
People who like horror games get their fun out of being scared. People who like the numbers role in asymmetrical games get their fun out of being underpowered. Thus, for the target audience, good killers are fun to play against.
This is true, they need to be powerful and something to fear, such as Michael.
I totally agree. They're listening to feedback and trying to give us what we want. Isn't that what we want them to do? Also, all killers are "good." There are two brokenly strong killers, yes, and there shouldn't be more like that. I absolutely want them to create more fun killers, especially since there's a significant killer shortage and getting games as a survivor takes upwards of ten minutes, while as killer I get people instantly.
Now, perhaps, Legion was a bad example, but I'm still willing to check out any new killer they release, as the creative ones are far more interesting than licensed ones. I never thought there would be any licensed ones to begin with, and I fee bad more people would rather see this killer from their favorite movies than something new and interesting.
That said, I'm still waiting for Pumpkinhead ~_~ (maybe with Lance Henriksen)
Why not fun and good at same time?