Raconteurminator
Raconteurminator
About
- Username
- Raconteurminator
- Joined
- Visits
- 3,504
- Last Active
Comments
-
They've tried removing the DC penalty before, it went about as well as you'd expect. Bots were implemented to mitigate the impact of someone leaving, they were never implemented to facilitate someone leaving.
-
Just to be petulant, to be completely honest. Someone with a massive sense of entitlement has just ruined the game for their entire team, you're damn right I'm going to keep you in the match, that you agreed to play, for as long as possible. We've all lost because of you anyway, so if you decide to stay and 'sabotage' the game, then who cares? Your whole plan was to leave and go next; if you stay to be childish, you're still in the game and your whole plan was worthless.
-
If the game is doing all the heavy thinking for players, what actual skill remains, and what even is the point of human participation?
-
I think sometimes people forget how hilariously broken Dracula is. Even when you don't bring specific powers into it, this is someone that moves fast enough to essentially be invisible while also possessing the strength to crumple solid steel like paper (while heavily weakened). He's stronger than the strongest Killer, faster than the fastest, more durable than the most durable. And that's before you bring in the magic and reality-warping nonsense, the power to dominate souls, and the fact that literal Death is his employee of the month. The only way you 'kill' Dracula is with the Vampire Killer, and only a Belmont gets to wield that without significant consequences.
Someone said it in another topic, but Dracula is basically Super Satan in lore.
-
Mortal Kombat Armageddon did something exactly like this. It was very dumb and strangely quite fun.
-
No, but I think I've found my new favourite thing to do.
-
Survivors aren't supposed to defeat the Killer, they're supposed to escape. As already mentioned, if you wanted to add this to the game, Killers would need to be significantly stronger. In Friday the 13th, Jason could kill you pretty much as soon as he saw you; a grab was instant death if you didn't have an escape item and, failing that, basic attacks were quick and very hard to avoid. Even with that, being able to fight back and kill Jason wasn't particularly balanced, regardless of the hoops it required you to jump through.
You want to fight back and defeat the Killer, what you don't want is the required balancing.
-
The community is bad enough with only text chat, nobody needs the player-base to gain access to voice chat. I think sometimes people forget that this, despite how many charming people may post here, is still one of the most toxic communities in gaming. It'd be a system that confers minimal advantage in the setting it's implemented (solo-queue), makes things harder for Behaviour to moderate, and can't really be balanced around because it's not mandatory.
In all likelihood, I could see it having a high use-rate in the first two or three days, then it would drop down to below 15% in most regions and never recover. It would be toxic children screaming at toxic children while everyone else nopes out and permanently mutes voice chat. It wouldn't be worth the time, effort, or money to implement and manage.
-
Simon makes the most sense, but if the crossover is drawing more inspiration from the show than the games, Trevor is a big possibility.
-
He can teleport. I think we know what Behaviour will do with him.
-
@Sava18 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3722476#Comment_3722476
ummmm, let me reiterate, siege is infinitely more meaningful in regards to sound. You bringing up assym is just an excuse.
Bhvr didn't choose anything as I said it's up to them to somewhat adapt the major hardware devs not the otherway around. They know in advance.
These headset programs existed consistently before dbd, it's not on the players at all. Considering it legit cheating is just trying to make yourself feel better or you got slighted in some other game.
Something everyone has access to easily and isn't against the rules is not cheating. Just accept it, you have very weak arguments here. Your entire first paragraph is just straight up wrong besides the very last sentence and it's not even a debate, it's wild you even typed that out.
Let me reiterate; I am not, was not, and continue to not talk about another game in another genre in a topic that is about Dead By Daylight. They're two different games, of two (completely) different genres, that by their very nature require different types of balancing - that's not an excuse, that's completely relevant, whether you choose to hand-wave that or not.
We're not talking about Siege, we're talking about Dead by Daylight. One is an FPS, one is an asymmetrical game — a genre notoriously hard to balance — that relies heavily upon its sound design for part of that balancing.
This is the first paragraph of my response to you, minus the one apparently correct part. According to you, this is a topic about Rainbow Six Siege, Siege is not an FPS and Dead By Daylight is not an asymmetrical game. It's also apparently a very easy genre to balance, despite all the evidence to the contrary. What's wild is that you came back to a topic that was pretty much dead to, "Nuh, u r actually wrong" and start an argument out of a normal conversation with such a ridiculous statement that it makes me question whether or not you're even reading things. That paragraph was 55 words long and you didn't read 38 of them.
If this conversation hadn't reached its conclusion before, it has now. I don't care for your unearned arrogance, your projection and your condescension. I don't care either for whatever backtracking or scrabbling you'll do in response to this post to make yourself look correct, so don't bother responding because I won't waste my time reading it, nor will I give you any further attention.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3722438#Comment_3722438
So basically because the game is poorly optimized and does not have certain options that any other reasonable game has makes this different? ^^
That's clearly not what I said or even remotely implied. If you wish to infer that, you're welcome to do so, but you've clearly given up on the pretence of having an actual discussion at this point.
@Sava18 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3722023#Comment_3722023
It's not an unfair advantage if everyone has reasonable access to it. It's why something like nvidia filters are fine because ALOT of monitors are capable of something similar these days.
Sure it's not enforceable but again everyone has some access to it.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3722438#Comment_3722438
In a game much more competitive and FAR more sound based like siege the devs have known about it and even encouraged it forever ago. It's not even really third party as all devs should know what to expect from the software of major hardware companies.
We're not talking about Siege, we're talking about Dead by Daylight. One is an FPS, one is an asymmetrical game — a genre notoriously hard to balance — that relies heavily upon its sound design for part of that balancing. What another dev, that created another game in another genre, chooses to do is up to them.
"Knowing what to expect" doesn't suddenly make specific brands of headphones with filtering hardware, that Behaviour has no involvement with, first-party. They're still third-party, and they're still allowing you to manipulate the game audio in unintended ways.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3722207#Comment_3722207
Why not? Both give you an advantage by using them? Both are hardware and do exactly what they are supposed to do, where exactly is the difference?
If a game is capable of being run at 120hz, then all that monitor is doing is allowing you to avail yourself fully of what the game is capable of. You're using your hardware to play the game in a way that was intended. A refresh rate of 120hz isn't going to do a damn thing if a game couldn't run beyond 60 hz, and any attempts to mod that frame rate to be higher A) Has nothing to do with the monitor (because frame interpolation isn't handled by the monitor), and B) Would risk causing significant issues, including latency.
The game does not come with audio sliders to raise or reduce the prominence of certain sounds, it does not come with hardware to filter sounds. If you own the best set of headphones in the world, you might be able to pick up more subtle sounds, but that is not the same as having specific hardware or software to manipulate the levels of those sounds for an advantage. That is not an advantage specific to headphones, it's an advantage afforded by specific headphones with specific hardware and software that allows you to interact with the game audio in an unintended way.
You know this, you're not dumb. You're just arguing for the sake of arguing at this point.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3722023#Comment_3722023
Is it then cheating to have a 120 hz monitor for a higher framerate because it clearly gives you an advantage over people with a lower framerate? I don't think it is clearly cheating, it is completely fine to use any hardware you want to use.
They're not the same thing, friend.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3721810#Comment_3721810
I mean that is a point as well, but it is still not cheating since there are no restrictions to hardware… How would it be cheating then?
Using something outside the scope of the game to gain an unfair advantage is quite clearly cheating. Behaviour simply chooses to avoid addressing certain things because it would achieve nothing but flood the system with reports that would go nowhere. To ban something that you know, I know, and they know is unverifiable and unenforceable would only make them look ridiculous. To make it a reportable offence when you know, I know, and they know that 100% of those reports would have to be discarded would only further the ridiculousness.
To any reasonable person, it's still cheating. It just can't be proven and is easier for Behaviour to ignore it.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3721753#Comment_3721753
Cheating involves being against the rules, so it is not cheating.
You missed the point. It's not classed as cheating by Behaviour because it would be meaningless, not because it's not cheating. It's impossible to prove someone is doing it, it's impossible to ban people for it, it's unenforceable. All it would do is create a window for people to clog the system with reports that Behaviour wouldn't be able to act upon.
Using a third-party device to gain a significant, unintended advantage over other players is quite clearly cheating.
-
Is it cheating? Absolutely. Is it reportable, bannable or even remotely detectable? No, it's not. It's not against the rules by virtue of it being completely unenforceable.
-
@FreddyVoorhees said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3720871#Comment_3720871
In China for sure. But it will never get bad like that in the western world. Especially in EU.
You clearly have no idea what sort of censorious nonsense the EU is capable of - especially in the field of internet censorship via AI. What happens in China can happen anywhere in the world if the populace is complacent enough.
-
The thing with shadow-flagging people is, with them not being intended to know, they A) Cannot make a conscious decision to rectify that behaviour before something happens, and B) Once something does happen, they'll still be unaware (outside of increased wait times), so they'll never be able to get themselves out of their situation.
The only reason you could possibly want a completely opaque, let's call it what it is, Social Credit system, is that you want people to be punished without an opportunity for self-improvement, you want people to be punished for, potentially, arbitrary reasons without them even knowing. Making everyone walk on eggshells isn't going to make the game better.
-
It's an asymmetrical game, you're not supposed to level the playing field. You are, individually, supposed to be at a significant disadvantage. The game is balanced around 1v4, not 1v1.
-
Is the perk broken? No. Is it unhealthy for there to be perks that bypass foundational skills? Yes. Situational awareness is an incredibly important ability to posses; Windows of Opportunity both bypasses that and offers no incentive to ever learn it.
-
@ProbablyJoke said:
Counts slugs as "teammates" for the sake of the meter not working, some killers legit down a person and drop them under hooks so they can get 2 free kills.
That only works if the Killer is playing against people that have no idea they can move on the ground. Someone that realises they can move? They just crawl off and get healed.
-
I think you're giving Behaviour too much credit. It looks like another case of them looking at a spreadsheet and deciding that because something is used a lot, it must be broken and in need of a nerf. We know from the time they tried to nerf Billy's Engravings that Behaviour doesn't seem to put much more thought into things beyond what numbers in a column say.
-
It's not about being a Killer main or a Survivor main, it's about insta-blinds, in any form, being objectively terrible for the game.
-
@I_CAME said:
If the game isn't fun for people then they're going to act this way. I've played this game for years and people did not give up anywhere near as much when I started. There is something fundamentally wrong with the game itself if people are giving up on a consistent basis. Maybe look into that if you want to stop people from giving up. Just whining about people being entitled doesn't actually fix anything and it never will. I've said before that I don't believe the current balance philosophy is sustainable long term and I still feel this way.
It would take a uniquely petulant kind of person to remain playing a game where they don't have fun just to make sure everyone else isn't having fun. It's not how normal people behave; normal people stop playing the game, they don't actively contribute to others not wanting to play the game. There is something fundamentally wrong with the game, on many levels, entitled players removing what little fun others have left is certainly one of those issues.
-
We all make mistakes, we all have our moments of shame. You've recognised yours and genuinely want to improve as a person. I've never spoken with you, so it's not within my power to condemn or forgive your behaviour, but even if no-one else forgives you, I hope you can forgive yourself; it seems like you need that the most.
-
Sunrise negates the existence of Lethal Pursuer and is basically a slightly less effective Distortion but for the whole team. If it became meta, that's potentially 2m 20s of aura blocking. That would kill aura perks entirely and lead to Killers just bringing more slowdown, which I'm guessing no-one wants.
Emergency Call is potentially fine.
Reuse sounds nightmarish. Those tokens would be spent on nothing but god pallets. Would probably become meta alongside whatever map offering would make best use of it.
-
@devoutartist said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3707236#Comment_3707236
ah but young apprentice you've only seen what pouring outside the box just you wait when you see "THE INSIDE"
It's supposed to be Hope, but it looks suspiciously like an extended middle finger.
-
@Halloulle said:
I always find it funny how people get hung up on the "face" part and repeat that part like a broken record - and even cite some of the relevant dev posts… just not all relevant passages.
Let me ask you this: What was the devs' reason to implement that mechanic? What is its stated purpose?
It was to deal with frustrations and feeling powerless on the survivor side; make survivors have agency in a situation where they don't have it.
Question: Does this mechanic achieve this?
Answer: No. Just being able to take an action isn't the same as having agency. - If it was all about "being able to take some action while hanging around" nothing was needed: there's 4% and there are skill checks. Between getting camped at 0.5 meters distance and at 5-12 meters distance and getting downed ten seconds after the unhook is no effective difference.
As it is now it's an anti-BM-on-hook-mechanic. Which would be perfectly fine… if they actually said that this was the intended purpose.
The dev's intentions? Oh, that's easy. To stop facecamping: it's both literally the name of the system and the intention that they expressed multiple times publicly. If you want certain people to stop repeating very, very, very, very, very simple explanations like a broken record, then other people need to stop telling the devs what they did or didn't intend, stop renaming their system, and stop with posts like this. The system is called Anti-Facecamp, it only activates when you facecamp and is only designed to activate when you facecamp. No amount of reading between the lines or Olympic gold medal mental gymnastics will change that.
-
-
No, no it wouldn't be a good idea.
-
The amount of times I've walked past hooks that should have been obvious to me is an embarrassingly higher number than it should be.
-
And here I was thinking I was using Anonymous Mode just to be left alone. Turns out I'm just a terrible person and have no genuine reason to use it. I'm so glad you were here to correct my maleficent ways.
-
Bubba brings snacks, everyone politely declines.
-
I've completed the first one, enjoyed everything but the upgrades being locked behind the asinine camera. Tried the second, and it was a thoroughly unenjoyable experience. They took the worst part of the first game (the random escort quest towards the end) and expanded it into most of what the second game was about. I hear Infinite is better, but 2 really killed my vibe.
-
As far as I'm aware, when you report someone, the chatlog is sent along with the report. They harassed you and admitted it, so it should be an easy ban/suspension.
-
EDIT: Turns out the last post was deleted because the post I quoted was edited by a mod. They could have deleted the quote from my post (like they have done previously) because contextually, the post wouldn't have changed. Now this post has had a sentence removed that completely erases all the context and makes it look nonsensical. Neat. If you're a mod and you see this post, please delete it. Thank you.
-
I like the concept of resource management and utilisation. Looking at the list of effects, I can also see why the blood orange has a steeper requirement to get, as it's used in all of the most powerful combinations. I don't think the power is particularly complicated, but it does seem like something Behaviour would deem too complicated for the average player and dumb down significantly.
With the exception of Chef's Kiss and Dine and Dash (which is a really great name for the perk), I think the other perks either are, or have the potential to be, massively broken. The Customer is Always Right is just a super-powered Object of Obsession with a minimal activation cost, no downside, and a duration that's close enough to permanent to make no real difference. To balance it out and pick one from the Killer side; 5 Star Service is overpowered by itself, but combined with a multitude of perks that can swap the Obsession pretty much on demand, it's going to lack counter-play.
Last part of your post, kinda wholesome, not gonna lie.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3702521#Comment_3702521
Even if, but the kills = argument does not have a reason that is based on something else that lies within the gameplay, so no reasons vs bad reasons is still something.
The more posts I read on this board, the more and more I am becoming convinced that 99% of people here have never played another videogame before.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3702437#Comment_3702437
That is just what you subjectively made out to be the win condition. From a lore standpoint you as the killer win when the entity got to see an interesting match, that can just as well be done without sacrificing anyone.
Therefore I don't agree that the win condition is very clear.
The lore is meaningless apropos the gameplay.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3702432#Comment_3702432
Technically it has never been defined what a win is... Before the introduction of mmr you could easily get pips from that and therefore "win"... I would not go that far to call that fallacious...
It hasn't been defined by the devs because for some very strange reason they refuse to do so, and even more strangely they forget that asymmetrical games have existed long before Dead By Daylight and have long since answered the question of how win conditions work in a 1 v Many scenario. The win condition is very, very clear.
The Killer is going against a group of four players that operate independently, can choose to work as a team, and that each have the individual win condition of escaping. If 3 Survivors escape and you do not, you have not won. If you escape and they do not, they do not win because of you. If the Killer sacrifices the majority of Survivors, they statistically, have completed their win condition by sacrificing more Survivors than have escaped. If they do not, they have statistically, not completed their win condition.
-
Telling people 9 hooks and 1 kill was a win would be just as fallacious as telling them 4 hooks and 4 kills was a loss. The win condition is already defined, the win condition has never been one of the game's many issues.
-
If you weren't punished for having a bad connection, then you'd get to punish everyone else with your bad connection. You ask for empathy from others, yet seem to have none for those you'd end up in a game with.
-
If you're not having fun, if taking a break won't change anything, the answer is obvious. Stop playing. And I don't say that to be a jerk, I say that because you're quite clearly perpetuating your own misery. It's a game; if you're not having fun, then it's failing at its purpose and you should have the good grace to walk away rather than clinging to the hope of a betterness that may never come.
-
They said they're removing depipping, so your wish came true.
-
If you've never failed in your assumption that a Killer is running NOED, why are you complaining about it? If you 100% know that Killer has the perk, you should be cleansing totems. If they're as bad as you say they are, you should be able to do that without any issue at all.
Even in the best possible scenario for the Killer, NOED only gets them the 4K when Survivors play like moths. Killers aren't entitled to a 4K, but neither are Survivors entitled to a 4E. Someone on hook, totem in a bad spot? That's A) a Killer that will refuse to leave the area for fear of losing their totem and their victim, and B) 3 Survivors that should cut their losses and exit from the furthest gate as soon as possible.
NOED (like all endgame perks), requires you to sacrifice a perk slot for 90% of the match in order to gain something in the endgame. You're shifting a portion of your pressure, a portion of your power, to a different point in the match; one where it matters considerably more. You're not gaining something undeserved, you're moving something you already had further down the road at the expense of the now.
-
Maurice walks into a bar and orders a drink. The barkeeper turns to him and says, "You've been here every night this week, are you sure you don't have a drinking problem?" Maurice replies, "I don't think so," and promptly vanishes.
I should have said this joke was a play on the quote, "I think, therefore I am," but that would have been putting Descartes before the horse.
-
DBD Social Credit, what could possibly go wrong?
-
Singularity is canonically ten times stronger than a human. A gorilla is "only" six times stronger, so that's fun. He's not winning an arm wrestling match as much as he's just straight up removing arms.
-
3 reasons, no particular order.
- Tall
- Vampire
- Lady