Judgment may have revealed an issue in the mindset of (some) Survivors
I've been playing Judgment for about 10 days now. And the MMR reset will have undoubtedly contributed to my experience playing Judgment, but still I noticed a crazy amount of survivors being salty after matches, calling her a broken/braindead killer. Berating me for using a certain playstyle, bringing certain perks, etc..
Why? Because they were not having fun. They were mostly unable to counter my playstyle or perks, probably due to not having enough experience against Judgment yet, which is perfectly understandable whenever a new killer releases.
They all had a certain level of expectations from me, their teammates, the trial itself, and they became irritated when things didn't go their way. It's almost as if they expect certain results or outcomes to just be handed to them.
This is sometimes referred to as "Survivor Entitlement". Something that I've had to deal with a lot, regardless of the role I played over the past 4 years (80% survivor, 20% killer by the way). And lately it's becoming more apparent.
So, I feel compelled to once again be painfully clear. (I've gone in a lot of detail this time for all the newer DBD players or anyone who simply needs a reminder.)
When playing public matches in Dead by Daylight, regardless of role or game mode:
You are entitled to nothing. Absolutely nothing.
For both roles, this means that during a trial:
- You are not entitled to a favorable outcome of the trial
- You are not entitled to only play on realms/maps that you personally like
- You are not entitled to not see a certain character in the trial, because you dislike or even hate them
Additionally, when playing a trial as a Survivor:
- You are not entitled to have teammates of a certain skill level
- You are not entitled to only play against killers that you personally like
- You are not entitled to the killer being what you would call 'friendly'
- You are not entitled to the killer not utilizing a certain playstyle
- You are not entitled to the killer not bringing the best possible perks and add-ons that they can
- You are not entitled to not be tunneled, if the killer decides to do so
- You are not entitled to not be slugged, if the killer decides to do so
- You are not entitled to not be proxy-camped, if the killer decides to do so
And when playing a trial as a killer:
- You are not entitled to not play against what is called a 'bully squad'
- You are not entitled to not have survivors repair generators as fast as they possibly can.
- You are not entitled to the survivors not bringing the best possible perks and add-ons that they can
For the parts that you can actually influence: If you do want to achieve a certain result, then you have to work for it.
You will have to put in effort. That means trying, failing, re-trying, and doing it all over again until you get the result you want. You will not get certain results or outcomes handed to you. Other players are not responsible for your fun.
And yes, I had to learn that too, because I too used to be what you'd call 'entitled'. And I'm happy to say that I've left that behind me.
So, from an ex-entitled DBD-player to anyone who needs to hear it: If you want to achieve something, work for it. Just like everyone else.
Comments
Can I get an Amen?! AMEN!
But boy howdy is this gonna tilt some folks 🤣
And guess what? You are unfortunately also not entitled to force players to play against you if they don't want to and find it unfun…
Not saying you should give up or be a bad sport, but if people are sick of certain ######### they are allowed to be sick of that #########. I would personally berate BHVR for allowing this ######### to be released cause it's not players fault that they are using a character correctly.
I'm not forcing anyone to play against me. They are playing Dead by Daylight out of their own free will (at least I hope so), thereby accepting anything that the game can throw at them.
They don't get to cherry-pick the parts that they like. And if that doesn't work for them, they can stop playing at any time. Just close the game and play something else.
Correct, only killers get to do that!
Ah yes, because clearly, killers control what perks survivors take or what loops they pick.
Oh wait, they don't, survivors dictate that.
Killers should do their best to kill survivors, and survivors should do their best trying to survive. Both sides should use all ingame-methods available to do so.
Trying to manifest "rules" into existence because one subjectively does not like a playstyle is pointless.
it takes a certain lack of awareness to tell other people that they are not entitled to their own thoughts, feelings and autonomy. especially in regards to something that is nothing more than a product.
This is.. a very bad take.
Of cause you should be entitled to people playing a certain way and when they don't you should complain. I remember back when this game use to quite new survivors had a saying "get good in the chase." It was a way of just shutting down valid criticism of how the game was designed. While I agree the devs hold the ultimate responsibility in maintaining fun and balance as a community you should try to promote the game in a way that is fun. I understand that is subjective too a point but survivors have been offering valid criticism of killers who people don't want to go against and have just been silenced.
I really hate the DC penalty because it was mostly introduced to hide the fact things like if it was removed survivors would DC most matches against Ghoul or Jason. I'm not saying that means they have to be rushed nerfed but you have to acknowledge flaws in their design.
here is my question. The second floor of RPD library use to accessible and when certain builds almost impossible to get hooks. Would you say that survivors that use this build were ruining the match by abusing a flaw in the design or should killers just have to deal with it?
So you are fine with people dcing your matches and $uiciding on hook?
Out of curiosity what perks were you running on Judgment, trying to get some ideas for myself.
I've played enough of the game to realise the game is just going to go however it wants. Its all a big dice roll. And if I had a bad time in the round getting tunneled or the whole team gets slugged or they camped each person to death somehow, and they say gg, I just go to the next round without saying a thing.
I mostly agree with this but disagree vehemently survivors aren't entitled to good teammates or at least teammates around their skill level. That's the entire point of having MMR and SBMM and that is actually very important to make sure happens because the way the game works the killer only needs to find one weak player to make it a 3v1 so if you have 3 cracked survivors and 1 weak survivor that 1 weak survivor is gonna drag the other 3 way down.
This is either sarcasm, ragebait, or you genuinly believe that. I can't tell unfortunately. Could you elaborate?
Killers should just have to deal with it, since it was in the game. If survivors want to play that way and the game allows it, then they should.
Was it healthy? An argument could be made for not. And in the end, BHVR did in fact change it, so they must have thought so too. But it's not as if there are unwritten rules that dictate that players should or should not play a certain way. That's the argument I'm trying to make.
No. Absolutely not. They should absolutely not do that. Why would you willingly join the game, only to DC or refuse to participate in the game? Them doing that because they don't like how the game is going is exactly what I'm talking about. No player, survivor or killer, should throw a tantrum because they don't like we way things are going.
Every video game that involves multiple human players will have unpredictable and unexpected elements in it. But isn't that one of the reason why we play multiplayer games?
You know what, I actually somewhat agree:
I agree with you that MMR and SBMM shoud indeed match you up with other players with the same or similar MMR.
However, during the last Discord Dev stream (and please correct me if I'm wrong about this), I remember the devs stating the the new MMR system prioritizes queue-times over accurate MMR matching. And additionally, regardless of MMR, players can have off-days as well, therefore not performing according to their 'expected' MMR.
So yes, I completely agree with you that there should be a reasonable expectation of similar skill levels. But in some cases it simply wont be guaranteed, so you should not always expect it.
Perks:
Lethal Pursuer
Gearhead
Nemesis
Celestial Witness
Add-ons:
Electric Torch
Blindfold of the Devoted
The idea of this build is to have random aura all over the place when survivors least expect it. Judgment is in a position where she can quickly switch targets, if an opportunity presents itself. But it's also very easy to counter if you coordinate properly as a SWF. But I don't mind. I play for fun. And if I win, great. if not, so be it. It's all part of the game.
Best counters against this build are "Boon: Shadowstep", and believe it or not: "Residual Manifest", combined with "Blast Mine". Because Judgment doesn't hook very often and mainly uses her power to down survivors, Judgment players will most likely never bring perks like PainRes or Surge in their build. So they have to kick gens to regress them (and maybe apply Eruption). And the 'Residual BlastMine' combo directly counters that.
Also, running "We See You" when you're part of a SWF is also effective. You can deduce what perks and/or addons Judgment has and even use it against her, by revealing her to your teammates. Being able to tell where and when Divine Light might be coming from for 15 seconds can be an absolute game changer.
People were freaking out abt judgment even before release. Im not surprised that mindset came w the killer bc mindsets abt dbd have been bad for a lot of ppl. People disconnect when i play lich sometimes but i rarely get jerk survivors when i play him in comparison to like if i play legion, Jason or myers.
Im sure it happens w killers too, bc ppl are just extra af abt this game. I dont come into it with expectations and i stopped doing that long ago when i played as survivor most of the time. I come in, play the game and hope my jumpscares keep ppl entertained. It makes me happy when ppl mention that, bc that means my goal was successful. Sometimes i just wanna spook ppl.
Quoting from two different replies:
But it's not as if there are unwritten rules that dictate that players should or should not play a certain way. That's the argument I'm trying to make.and
No player, survivor or killer, should throw a tantrum because they don't like we way things are going.Why is it not a entitlement/unwritten rule to expect people not to suicide?
BHVR has a an 'anti-go' next system, if a player doesn't trigger it, what's the problem?
If we're using BHVR has our arbiter, they've said multiple times that people can play the game, broadly, how they want. Want to play for pips? Hide for hatch? Never touch a gen? As long as they fit within the broad rules BHVR has laid out, aren't you asking for your own 'unwritten' rule on how people behave?
Because players can play the game anyway the want, within the confines of what the game allows. Anyone, including myself, can have (and most certainly has) certain expectations about other players, that is absolutely true. But you cannot have guarantees from anyone.
So if a survivor decides to kills themself on hook (and by that I mean when it's early in the game, they're on their first hook and they brought a perk/offering that allows for a chance to self unhook), there's nothing anyone can do to dissuade them of doing so, because the game allows it.
It's an absolute ######### move towards your team, because you're basically abandoning your team early on, but they can still do it if they choose to.
For every trial, I have only one expectation (not a demand) for the other players and that is that they want to play the match through until the end (why would you queue otherwise?) and that they do their best, regardless of how much that is. But I'm certainly not allowed to actually demand all of that, or anything else. From any player.
And that's the point I'm trying to make here: When playing Dead by Daylight, or any multiplayer PvP game for that matter, you cannot demand any behaviors, results, or outcomes from the others players.
Expectations, sure. But demands, no. Absolutely not.
And I started this whole topic because survivor players that I've encountered in the last 10 days while playing Judgment demanded certain behaviors from me. Certain outcomes. And if I choose not to provide those, that's totally fine, because every player can play the game how they want, within the confines of what the game allows.
And on a side-note: There is a difference between sabotaging your own team for selfish reasons at the start of the trial, and bringing certain perks or using a certain playstyle. And although both are allowed, if you have to complain, I'd probably complain about the former.
Expectations, sure. But demands, no. Absolutely not.What's your line between an expectation and a demand?
You can expect a killer to play 'fair' (as in, don't tunnel, slug, camp), but you cannot go into end-game chat if they did it anyway (for whatever reason) and berate them for it. You cannot demand from the killer that they should have played 'fair'. If they choose to tunnel, slug or camp, then that's well within their right. The game allows it after all.
You can also expect Survivors to not behave toxic towards the killer by using Head-on, flashbangs, t-bagging constantly, but you cannot demand that they won't. You cannot go into end-game chat and demand that they won't do it again. The game allows it, so they are well within their right to do it.
And in my particular case, you can expect a killer player not to play as a certain character (in my case, Judgment), because some players consider her to be OP, but you cannot demand it.
I got berated multiple times in end-game chat for my playstyle (random-aura build) and that I only won because was I was playing a 'broken' killer and that they would have won if it was any other killer. Survivor-players do not get to demand from killer-players which killer they play, or how they play. They do not get to demand that I play anything other than Judgment.
It sounds more like your issue is not expectations vs demands, but don't be rude in end game chat.
So you do not want to force people to play against you…but you don't want them to leave the match if they are not having fun...i dont get it tbh
End-game chat is certainly a part of it. But that's more of a symptom. It's also the player's behavior during the trials. I recently had a Vee who gave up after being hit once with Divine Light. She was saved by her teammates and healed every time, but just stood there, not participating. And she was complaining in end-game chat afterwards.
I even made a post about it on Reddit, asking why players would do something like that, complete with footage of the Vee player. This resulted in over 200 comments arguing both for and against the Vee's behavior. The post is called "Of course the Judgement's kill-rate is 'high'...", in case you want to look it up.
So there's my personal experiences during trials from the past 4 years, the end-game chat messages I've received during that time, and recently the discussion regarding survivor behavior on Reddit.
Based on all this, I am genuinely convinced that these types of survivor-player truly believe that they are entitled to certain guarantees and outcomes.
That's right. I don't want to force people to play against me. But whenever they queue-up for a survivor match, they declare their intent to want to play against a killer. And if I queue-up at around the same time as killer, I declare my intent that I want to play against survivors, and there's a chance that they get paired up with me in a trial. Obviously, neither of us can influence who get's paired up with who for a trial. But the fact remains that they made the conscious choice to be paired up against a killer player, playing any of the available killer characters in the game. They willingly chose to do that by selecting "Survivor" from the menu and pressing the big "Play" button.
And because they chose that, I am under the impression that they intent to play a trial as a survivor. Therefore I expect them to commit to it until the trial is over for them, regardless of their skill level. So, giving up or ending yourself on hook before the trial is over is not a very cool thing to do towards the rest of their team and me as the killer.
If they committed to playing as a survivor during the trial, I expect them to see it through until the point where, under normal circumstances, the trial ends for them. And that, while they're playing, they do their best, regardless of how good that is.
So, to answer your question: You are indeed correct in stating that I don't want to force anyone to play against me and I also don't want them to leave the match if they are not having fun. Because that is something that I think they should have considered beforehand. They have all the information of what they can potentially face. And they can't cherry-pick parts of the experience that they want and simply disregard the rest. If they want that, then they should play a single player game with mods, to that they can tailor the experience to what they want.
Because that is simply not possible in a multiplayer game involving other human players.
TBH, i've seen people running in a straight line against Judgment and complaining how they could be hit. Or healing right beside the chase and getting mad the were downed.
I hope in some weeks people get a better understatement on how this killer works and how to counter better, as it was when Unknown came out.
So i can't play survivor if i don't wanna play against the crayon muncher?
If you dislike it so much, then maybe this is not the game for you… that is exactly the entitlement OP was talking about
This post itself reeks of entitlement. "YOU MUST PLAY AGAINST ME NO MATTER WHAT I PLAY OR UR ENTITLED". The irony.
So should everyone have stopped playing when old skull merchant existed? Cause everyone found it unfun?
If the Crayon Muncher is part of the active roster and there is a chance that you get paired up with a killer player who plays them, but you want to avoid every possible chance of going up against the Crayon Muncher even once, then yes you can't play survivor.
But that's only because you choose to. Not your teammates, not the killer player, not the community, not BHVR.
You could also choose to just take the chance. With 44 other killer's there's about a 2.2% chance of the killer player picking the Crayon Muncher to play. And if you do end up playing against the Crayon Muncher, you can choose to at least try. You can choose to do you best regardless. See it as a chance to learn. To improve your skills. To be a good teammate.
And should you lose, then at least you've picked up some more experience that will help you in future trials, ultimately making you a better survivor player.
I'm waiting out the two years until he gets nerfed, thank you for the offer though.
Welp, there we have it friends, i am officialy forboden to play survivor from now on. A sad sad development.
Only because you choose to. No one else.
No, i would choose to play survivor or killer any way i want.
But i will of course respect your rulebook, no worries.
People voted for this and now they complain. Lmao.
Even if it's against the Crayon Muncher? :)
Or would you simply DC?
Depends on my mood. I can take about three crayon collectors in a row before i start to accept the dc penalty. I also tend to give up way faster against the creature, because the gameplay is simply unfun.
That may be the case, but also, not Judgment's responsibility. It is not up to the killer, or any of the other player, to ensure that you are having fun. The only one responsible for that is you.
That one surprised me as well and in my opinion it's not really necessary. But to be fair, it's been less than 24 hours since that change was applied, so let's just see how it impacts her performance and kill rates first, before we jump to conclusions.
This is fascinating: You're the second person I encounter calling it "abuse", as if what they're doing is not allowed or wrong. If the game allows killer players to bring certain perks and combine them in a way that is advantageous for them, then that's allowed.
The definition of "abuse" is the wrong use of something or the improper, cruel, or harmful treatment of a person. And the killer injuring, downing and hooking a survivor can indeed be considered harmful or cruel, but it's also the very core mechanic of killer gameplay. The killer's objective in Dead by Daylight is to literally do all that. And when you choose to play Survivor, you willingly subject yourself to the risk of that happening to your character during a trial. That's all part of the game.
So that leaves the "wrong use of something" part of the definition of "abuse". Can you explain to us how using certain perks can be considered the "wrong use"?
Also, when you say "uncounterable", I say:
To counter aura-perks you can use:
To find and cleanse totem-perks faster you can use:
So there are plenty of options to counter aura and totem perks.
They kinda do though, they get to lobby shop seeing items and the survivors they are playing against even getting to explore their steam or psn profiles and message the survivors if they so wish, they can use lightborn to outright deny flashlights and the like.
You could even argue they get to pick what flavour of the month killer they can play, there is nothing random other than map/perks for the killer and even then there is only a few meta builds for survivor now so its kind of predictable.
It's dated and trash design.
Well, yes, if you load up the game as survivor, you kinda have to accept that you could get any kind of killer, same way killers have to accept the perks survivors can bring, you either say no, I am not willing to take the risk and don't start the game, or you actually play the game, you can still criticize things, but loading up the game willingly, knowing there are things you "hate" or what not and then refusing to play, or being entitled to think it shouldn't be that way is just a sign of being stupid and own fault, you load up the game, so play the game, if you don't like it, then why do you play the game if something bothers you so badly, that you don't want to play?
I played during chess merchant and had actual chess merchant matches, but guess what, I knew about it, still started the game and actually played it, even if the match was unfun, that is PART OF THE GAME, you can still not like something, but you don't have to be a selfish person and just give up, because you feel like you are entitled to something. People should have either stopped playing during that time or not given up, then we might would have a functional SM right now, the one thing people should be entitled about is a functional game, like functional killer powers and not buggy messes.
But what if I like every killer other than judgment and the first? I'm just not allowed to play then?
Why do bad killers get to DC all the time and no one complains about this?
I am not even talking about that, all I am saying is play whoever you want, when someone starts the game, then they have no rights to just give up because of certain things, you can always criticize, valid and constructive criticism is good.
When a killer DCS then guess what, the match ends, the 4 survivors can just queue immediately and the killer should probably step back for a few minutes to cool down or stop for the day. When a survivor dces however or just gives up and is afk or whatever, then it's just a punishment for the other survivors, imagine a solo q player that is the first one getting hooked and giving up within a minute (that definitely does happen btw), the other 3 survivors are just screwed and gonna have a worse match, if a killer dces then nothing happens, no one else is getting punished or has to go through a potentially impossible to win match, everyone can just go next and queue for the next match.
You are always allowed to play. But if you willingly load up the game, go into a trial as a survivor, play against Judgment or The First, knowing full well that there is a chance that you could face either one of them, then complaining about it afterwards, just because you actually encountered one of them, is entitlement.
Because it results in a win for the survivors and a DC penalty for the killer. So the killer has no right to complain because they willingly DC'd, and the survivors have no reason to compain, because they get a free win.
Okay so based on what you've said the fair thing to do would be to end games immediately when a survivor dc's? Just how games end immediately when a killer dc's?
No. The survivors play as a team, which means that they have a shared responsibility toward a favorable result for the survivors. So if one of them decided to abandon the team by DC'ing, then that's on that survivor. They willingly and knowingly disadvantage their own team. It's certainly not the killer's fault.
The only widely accepted reason for DC'ing is if there's some kind of real-life emergency going on. But a lot of survivor players DC because they don't like how the trial is going. And that's not why you should DC.
That's the whole reason that the DC-penalty exists. And if survivor players really are under the impression that DC'ing a trial on a regular basis, thereby abandoning their team, is acceptable behavour, then maybe the minimum DC-penalty should be raised to 30 minutes. The whole idea of the DC-penalty is to discourage players from DC'ing while the trial is not yet over. So maybe 5 or 10 or 15 minutes is simply not enough.
So we should just punish the team if their teammate dc's instead of just ending the game? Whereas the killer can selfishly leave the game as they wish as the game doesn't punish others if a killer does this. How is it fair if I'm a survivor and my killer DC's, like you said, that's not my fault? Why should my game immediately end?
To make it clear i don't think you should DC frequently and i don't think it's good for the game. But we need to look at the reasons WHY people DC, especially more against certain killers or in certain games.
The only one who should be punished in that scenario is the survivor that DC'd. And that's what the DC-penalty is for. The game already does the next best thing it can do for the other players, which is to supply a bot to replace the DC'd survivor. It's not perfect, but it's better than nothing. A couple of years ago there were no bots to replace DC'ing survivors, so it used to be worse.
Why should others be punished for the killer DC'ing?
Because the entire opposing team is gone, so there's nothing for the survivors to play against anymore. And until BHVR replaces DC'ing killers with killer bots, then this is how it's gonna be.
Dead by Daylight is an asymmetrical PvP game. Asymmetrical, as in not identical on both sides. If all 4 survivors were to DC, then the trial is over too, because the entire team that was opposing the killer is gone. However, due to the bots replacing survivors the killer has the option to continue, instead of ending the match. But the option is there.
And also, with killer queue's being what they are right now, imagine a killer having to wait 10-15 minutes for a match, only for it to immediately or prematurely end when a survivor DC's, because they don't like the killer/map or some other reason. Is that fair towards the killer?
If an entire team is gone, then there is no more opposition for the remaining team. And the only reason that, in the case of a DC'ing killer, the match is immediately over, is because there are no killer bots yet.
Well that one's easy: Entitlement. Survivors feel like they are entitled to DC against certain killers or under certain conditions, because they believe it's not fair or not fun, or not what they were expecting.
And the whole point of me starting this entire post 2 days ago is to make it clear that they are in fact not entitled to do that. The only thing regarding Dead by Daylight that any player is entitled to, and I want to thank NordSahne for pointing that out, is a functional game. Because that's what we paid for.
No I and alot of people would argue Bots is way worse than just an old DC. An OLD DC ends the game faster and lets EVERYONE go next quicker rather than holding the rest of the team hostage in a now unwinnable game.
So would it be fine to replace DCing killers with killer bots then? You would support that change?
Why are killer ques so horrendous now compared to what they used to be hm? It's because no one wants to play survivor anymore. It's a miserable role Solo and you have to have 4 good players for it to be enjoyable. We kill the survivor role and now we want to further punish survivors even more and disincentivise people from playing survivor? This will simply make killer ques EVEN WORSE. This is precisely the point I'm getting to. We want to continue to punish survivors, force them to place every single match out, force them to play against miserable and unfun killers and unfun matches, and in the same breath scratch our heads and wonder why killer ques are so horrible? I'm saying this all as A KILLER MAIN, I don't want killer ques to get any worse that's why we need to incentivise people to play survivor more.
It's very easy to just point the finger at entitlement, its a cop out. Doesn't fix any of the issues regarding killer ques, survivors dcing, survivors giving up etc. If you punish DC's even more then people will just afk, or give up, or find other ways of not playing the game out properly if they don't want to.
Well, the fact that BHVR is working on it (which can be seen in 2V8), my guess is that there is in fact a majority or at least a large part of the player base that would support it.
No one is forcing them: They willingly press Play to queue-up against a killer. And they can't cherry-pick the parts of the experience that you want and discard the rest. If they want that, they should play a sandbox or single-player game.
I agree with you there. As in, it doesn't solve killer queues, survivors DC'ing or giving up. But it does cause Survivor's DC'ing or giving up, because they believe they have certain entitlements about various parts of the trials.
Honestly, for the overall quality of the survivor-part of the player base, that would not necessarily be a bad thing.
Dead by Daylight has a very steep learning curve. Everyone who wants to be good at the game has to put in a lot of time and effort to get the skills needed to play well. Not perfect, but well. And once you do, you will start to enjoy the game a lot more. Sure, you will still have bad matches, but not as much as before. With practice comes skill and with skill comes success.
And I was no different: I used to complain a lot as a survivor, because I was under the impression that the game wasn't fair. I even went so far as to (and this is something I actually did, and to this day am still ashamed of), go into the post-game chat afterwards to call the killer a coward (in capitals) for camping a hooked survivor in end-game. But it wasn't until I started playing more killer that I came to understand why they did it. And now I do it too: Once the gens are done there are no more objectives to defend. So a hooked survivor becomes your sole objective at that point. A consolation prize as it were.
Long story short: It turned out that there simply was a lot I didn't know yet. So I put in effort to learn, to understand and to get better. And now, compared to back then, I am. And I think that's what survivor players need to enjoy the game more: Put in time and effort to learn an understand the game. Make mistakes, learn from them, and improve.
And if they don't want to do that, if they don't want to learn, if they are not prepared to put in effort to get better, then for their own sake and mental well-being, maybe they should stop playing Dead by Daylight and pick a game that they can actually enjoy.
No one is forcing them, but if you want survivors to kill as killer your gonna need to encourage more people to play survivor. At the moment if I wanted to win playing this game I'd play killer any day, it's a far easier role to win on because the conditions for winning on survivor are much more strict at an equal skill level (needing a 4man etc).
I agree that there's deceptively alot of depth, especially macro wise but also prediction and game knowledge wise in this game. Especially as survivor it's incredibly difficult to learn alot of these things because you are reliant on teammates to learn alot of this stuff and execute it. This is part of the problem. The game is way harder to win as survivor at an average level so people are either gonna give up more, leave, dc etc or just go play killer, both of which are terrible options for longetivity of the game.
To fix this, you need to incentivise people to play more survivor and make it more enjoyable. The reason survivor used to be so popular, contrary to popular belief, is that survivor used to have alot of SOLO agency in the game. You could single handedly win a game as survivor through a good chase etc, there was alot of room for impact and skill expression INDIVIDUALLY. Unfortunately, the game has morphed so much now that individual survivor skill is alot less relevant and doesn't win you games, it's all about the team play and macro now, which is not only boring but encourages people to go play killer or get frustrated with the game because unlike killer, often there's literally nothing you can do to win a game, and too often. I only play survivor with ex-comp mates for example because otherwise it can get pretty miserable pretty fast. It feels like you're not working towards anything because you can't practise skills individually, you can't win games for your team and you can't make that impact.
I can somewhat see how it would be easier, but probably not for the same reason: When playing killer, you have all the control over how your 'team' plays, since there's only one killer. With survivor there's 4 in a team, which makes you indeed dependent on the other 3 survivors. That's why I have a serious problem with DC'in survivors, because you're supposed to play as 4 members of a team. Trials are, after all, balanced around 4 players, having to repair 5 generators, while being chased by 1 killer. So if one of the survivors is gone, then that's obviously gonna shift the balance in favor of the killer, depending on gen progress. So the Survivors have to put in more effort to get a favorable result. Hopefully the new Intent system is going to help with that.
I'm not sure I understand this one. Can you elaborate?
When not playing with friends and/or somewhat experienced players, learning can be slow maybe. Not sure it's gonna be difficult. There's a lot to learn and without friends providing feedback during trials, the learning process will take a lot longer. There's no one to tell you afterwards how the killer's perks factored into their strategy and what you could potentially do differently next time. So yeah, I can definitely see how learning without friends could be a lot slower.
Not everyone does that. I didn't. I kept trying, and ultimately I got better. And I can't be the only one that keeps trying.
Agreed. A 2.5x BP multiplier (if you're even lucky to get that) is not that interesting anymore.
Can you give an example of an in-game situation where this was the case?
As far as I remember (for the 4 years that I'm playing the game), Dead by Daylight has always been about teams: The Survivor-team, consisting of 4, vs the Killer-team, consisting of 1. And to say that individual skill is less relevant is not true in my opinion: If a survivor is skilled enough to keep a killer occupied long enough for multiple gens to pop, then how is that not relevant? How does that not help win games?
I actually had a match earlier today where my teammate kept a Jason occupied for 4 gens. Didn't even get injured until the 4th gen popped. Jason had practically lost at that point. So that teammate's individual skill definitely benefitted the rest of the team.
I don't see how a survivor's display of skill to help the team is boring. I personally don't think it is. In fact, I get a real rush after a long chase and even more if the killer abandons the chase.
Playing with random survivors can be tough, I'm not gonna deny that, so playing with friends to understand the game and who can communicate well is a lot easier and therefore (hopefully) fun. Thankfully though, the new Intent system will most likely remedy that at least a little bit.
Maybe not alone or only after a high amount of practice and experience. So playing with friends or being part of a community that can help you with that can be very helpful there. I myself am part of a community for Dutch speaking DBD players, and there's always the official Dead by Daylight Discord server that you can join to find teammates.
Playing survivor really isn't that bad. You just have to overcome the learning curve. And that takes effort and time.