Attackfrog
Attackfrog
About
- Username
- Attackfrog
- Joined
- Visits
- 880
- Last Active
Comments
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/761590#Comment_761590
Yeah, definitely nothing wrong with them.
https://www.twitch.tv/otzdarva/clip/VibrantViscousFennelGivePLZ?filter=clips&range=24hr&sort=time
I'd like to be able to play the game without being booted in 1/4th of my games for no reason despite my internet being perfectly fine.
Getting the same. No problems with my internet running every other program/game....just dbd
-
All the pics in this thread are of thin, fit people. It bodyshames people with glandular or thyroid issues or people that are overweight for other reasons!
I want bikini clown and an obese, shirtless survivor (male or female).
For empowerment because being unhealthy is somehow ok (and encouraged) in our world!
-
Servers are highly dependent on.location.
Before dedicated, since we can afford a very high speed internet, I had never had a problem getting into game and sustaining high speed connection.
Since dedicated: I have gotten loaded for just 1 game, which disconnected telling me "a player disconnected during loading", awarded me 1250 bloodshards...but when I exit the screen...was actually awarded NONE.
This game is borked for me. Hopefully enough other people will/can spend money on it so they can make it functional but for now, I am playing other games.
-
Yeah I have been having terrible qtimes as killers. This past week I decided if give it 5 mins to pop a q before going back to anogher game. I haven't gotten into a single game.
We just moved from CA to WI so !maybe that's the problem.
When you only have a few hours to play games , you don't want to be sitting in a q for half of it.
-
It is not a slap in the face but a shady marketing ploy.
Many will fall for it, as they do with this tactic in most games, and which makes it a successful business decision. Our culture preys upon ignorance and gullibility and this is a prime example of a company profiting from it.
The more people can learn.about these awful practices, the better. Some day, they will be outlawed, but until then, it is up to the consumer to educate ourselves about the predatory nature of such systems.
-
@Grimbergoth said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/750157#Comment_750157
but there also is the issue between free to play and subscription . Online play and support . Right now one of the most anticipated features seems to be dedicated servers , those will up the cost to keep this game running and online , those costs have to be covered someplace . Stand alone games that maybe offer minimal support or no support online do exist but they are far and few between because their lifespans are not usually that long . With what BHVR has been doing with the pass and cosmetics I see as fine because in 3 years if you played a stand along and paid average market value of $60 with one new release each year we would be into the $180 range alone . so considering that all the content or non cosmetic dlc's and the base game can be bought for 2/3rds that without a sale and 1/3rd that when on sale I think they are doing ok .
Now dont get me wrong I do understand that all companies are in it to make money , but so far costs are there for you to see and decide on if you want it or not and there is no real "Need" to buy cosmetics and passes . But I do agree that loot boxes are the bane of the f2p system and I try to not support that at all , like you stated its just a different form of online gambling .
But that is the fallacy they want you to believe (and why this "free" method takes in far more than a subsc ription).
I agree that a quality service shou!d be reimbursed and so should good, quality work. But that line becomes greyed with gambling boxes and "collection" items ( ie cosmetics). There is nothing to collect because despite how.much money you spend, the game could shut down at any moment, this you never really "own" any of it. When you have cosmetics, it preys upon collective and gambling personalities.
There are great resources available online that explain it far more intelligently than I can and I beg that anyone that believes this monetization scheme is "ok" please take a look at them. If, after a deeper understanding of how this marketing works and does take advantage of folks you still believe it is acceptible, then obviously you are free to believe and partake in it. Keep in mind this is a fairly new scheme so people aren't quite as aware of it yet (much like tobacco in the 50's).
I just don't believe that many people understand how "free" games truly operate (they are free for some but DEEPLY costly to many). It goes far beyond the superficial "model" that most people (including myself in past games!) Fall for.
-
@brokedownpalace said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/750623#Comment_750623
"Does that market actually WANT big boobed cartoons to act like children!?I"
Yes, they do.
Jesus. What's wrong with people?
-
And I never understood the manga/anime sexualization?
Does that market actually WANT big boobed cartoons to act like children!?I
I look at the Japanese manga/anime "sexy" characters and am a bit grossed out: over sexualizing a character with childish features? No thank you. Not sure why that is not only allowed but seems to be very popular.
-
If you are claiming to be "ancient", them as another "ancient" gamer, I will offer.you this nugget of wisdom:
"Free to play" means that it will cost FAR more than a stand alone title to play, there will be sleazy gimmicks (ie gambling boxes) and in exchange you can expect the game to be supported* for years tocome.
*in this instance "supported" means the developers will try to squeeze every vent out of players, even If it means taking advantage of gambling and collective personalities. It into way implies there will be added bug support (that does not support the monetization scheme) or game "ccongent " unrelated to said addictive and collective personalities.
TL;dr: free to play games are entirely what's wrong with the video game industry. I would infinitely prefer an all inclusive subscription or 1 time.purchase and have "sequels".
-
@AkiTheKitten said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743492#Comment_743492
That Just seems like an asinine idea tbh
Not really. Think about any business. They do what they think will bring in the majority of customers and sometimes it changes. The developers know that at any given moment 80% of people in game are survivors.
Why wouldn't you want to make them happy?
-
@GrootDude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743479#Comment_743479
Every time a new killer has info released you’ll see comments calling them op or up, it is better to wait.
Just about every killer that has been released since early access has been met with divided opinions. Legion was terrible....then OP.
Freddy was OP...then terrible.
pigs traps were OP, now people counter them
SPirit, plague, clown....all met with mixed reviews...all nerfed or buffed after.
Freddy rework: nearly totally one sided and it was a HUGE buff for him.
Nurse changes: VERY one sided. Based on the past it's a clear nerf.
-
@AkiTheKitten said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743459#Comment_743459
If killers don't play survivor, an unnecessary nerf won't convince them to. They'll just be pissed and leave the game
That might be true, but worst case is you're upsetting 20% of the players...likely less due to people that play both sides. Best case is you are making 80% feel stronger.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743337#Comment_743337
You should make a thread about it.
It would be called "stop telling me to make a thread after I post in a thread asking people to stop posting in threads asking people to stop making threads asking people to stop making threads".
-
@GrootDude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743457#Comment_743457
Then mindbreaker is a good perk, three seconds is a lot of time after all.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743453#Comment_743453
People said original MoM was too weak while others said it was too strong, does that make original MoM balanced? No, it didn’t.
Nurse needs tested before we decide if she is too weak.
you're right but people also complained that spirit was terrible....and she was, so they buffed her.
sometimes the forums are right. Sometimes they're wrong. In this situation, it's very one sided which has me worried.
-
@AkiTheKitten said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743442#Comment_743442
Nurse was never OP tho
I agree with this. I think she was one of 2-3 killers that rewarded practice. She sucked at low levels but became great with practice! But we can't have high end killers frustrating 80% of the player base so she needed a nerf.
-
@Mochan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743410#Comment_743410
What about killers?
Let's not act like BHVR has been doing nothing but nerf killers left and right.
Killers aren't leaving, if anything the game has more killers than it's ever had. Historically speaking Survivors have borne the brunt of the nerfs for the past couple of years (which makes sense because Survivors were too strong at launch).
Two years ago Survivor lobbies took forever because there were too many survivors and not enough killers. The opposite is true today -- killer lobbies take forever while survivor lobbies are instant. It's because there are more killers playing today comparatively to survivors than it was in the past.
Yes! Hence the S tier killer nerf. Enticing more people to play survivor.
It makes a lot of sense when you think about it.
-
@GrootDude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743439#Comment_743439
You’ll still be able to catch survivors, if 3.5 seconds is such a burden then mindbreaker is a godsend.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743442#Comment_743442
This is true, but the devs are trying to make this nurse change work, I think people will calm down after testing.
Well see. When it comes to pvp games a good sign of balance is when both factions are pissed. IS killers saying the nerf is too big and survivors saying the nerf isn't enough.
I haven't seen a single survivor sides complaint yet. That's a red flag that this is a Major nerf...
-
@GrootDude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743428#Comment_743428
Never said I wouldn’t state my viewpoints on it, I just said that the reason was probably because they felt that she was op.
Yes! Exactly! Which gets back to my original point. If people understood WHY we can't have an OP killer they would probably complain less.
these changes definitely blow but understanding the importance of the survivor role allows people to say "ooooh, yeah that makes sense now!" Instead of just being angry about a "killer nerf".
-
@justarandy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743367#Comment_743367
Ikr? Suspiciously quite and one sided atm
people ######### about the tiniest slight...and not a SINGLE survivor complaint that the nerfs weren't strong enough.
MAJOR red flag!
-
@GrootDude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743408#Comment_743408
The devs felt that nurse needed a change, not much more to it.
Don't think like that! If you like the changes, good! If you dont, complain! If everyone just accepted everything the "developers" told them, we'd all still be living in England as someone's slave!
This is 2019. If something sucks, we have more ways of expressing it than ever!
-
@Rivyn said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743373#Comment_743373
What about killers? You can't have this game if one side just gives up at high level because there's no solid counters anymore. When killers leave, what happens to those 'happy' survivors? Either they switch to killer, become unhappy, and leave, or they leave anyway because there's no challenge.
Killers drop money as well, ya know. But seeing as killers are boxed into three characters already if they want to be viable at high rank, that's a thin line to balance. This game isn't just survivor sided.
I explained it at length in another thread but basically at any given time, it is GURANTEED that at least 4/5 people playing this game CHOSE survivor. Of those 4/5, they must fall into 2 of the 3 categories: exclusive killer (nope), exclusive survivor (maybe), plays both killer and survivor (maybe).
Either way, survivor players or players that even SOMETIMES play survivor must make up the majority of the player base. If killer players were majority, we'd never have matches.
-
@GrootDude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743379#Comment_743379
Well I don’t believe in God so I don’t care about what reason God might have. I know the devs have a reason though.
Lol that is also what people say about "god".
Blind faith is blind faith, be it in a ghost man in the sky or video game developers.
I believe I understand why the developers made these changes. Some won't believe it (whether it's true or not), others will refuse to believe it and other s will at least accept is as a possibility of believe a different reason.
When it comes to spending money, I will always refuse to accept something on blind faith though (that's called gambling) Even credit card companies won't do that.
-
I actually feel like the developers never actually play as killers. They throw out these changes (not the first time) when there are genuinely better ideas tossed around on these forums (sometimes ha!).
I wonder if they even tried the changes for themselves before throwing them into the game.
-
@GrootDude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743316#Comment_743316
I don’t know the devs thought process, but I’m sure they have a reason.
People say the same thing about "God" when something terrible happens.
I would much prefer to be told the "reason".
-
@Rivyn said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743345#Comment_743345
And then you get to high rank and find that you have no competition, because devs have nerfed solid counters to swf to make newer players happy. Okay.
Correction: New SURVIVOR players.
and yes. A survivor that is succeeding and having fun is a survivor that will drop money. I discussed it in another thread but survivors make up 80% of the player base.I
you always try to keep 80% of your customers happy.
-
The fact that we don't see any survivors complaining about nurse right now is the real red flag...
Typically, if something is done well, both sides hate it (killers: nerfed to hard! Survivors: needs more nerf!), But these changes are far too one-sided for me to trust.
-
@GrootDude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743329#Comment_743329
If survivor que times became long (which they are on PS4 in my experience) giving survivors more bp would fix that but then more people would play survivor on other platforms, fixing que times would be too tricky to work. The 80% thing is still not necessarily true, if the 80% thing was true then killer que times would never be long.
Q times are simole...not enough killers and survivors wait. Not enough survivors and killers wait.
The 4:1 ratio is quite simple too. At any given time in any given match 80% of the people playing MUST be survivors. If this weren't the case, we would never get in game. Now this isn't considering ppl waiting in q (see my first paragraph) but considering you can only q as killer OR survivor, this ratio MUST exist.
It does not take into account dcs (obviously), but for any match to start, 80% of the people playing HAD to pick survivor role (since there is no "random" option).
-
Nope. It would be too powerful. If I'm a new survivor playing against nurse and I get frustrated or don't feel strong, I won't spend money on the game.
-
I wish people would stop making threads asking other people to stop making threads.
It's internet forums and they have their own moderators.
On the same token, I wish people would stop posting in threads asking people to stop making threads asking people to stop making threads. It's internet forums and they have their own moderators.
-
@GrootDude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743293#Comment_743293
If 80% of players played survivor then people wouldn’t complain about killer que times
@AkiTheKitten said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743295#Comment_743295
No killers, no lobbies. You have to keep killers happy too or you don't have a game
You are correct but no match can take place of there is not a 4:1 ratio. Every match that is played (whether there are 10 people online or 100,000) there MUST be 80% survivors.
That means 80% of people playing right now, or ever, have chosen to play survivor.
The fact that this game persists, ensures that there are 4 survivors playing for every killer.
Yes there are wait times but that reinforces the point. Some folks would rather play survivor than wait as killer (they fall into the middle category), thus by marketing to survivors you are not excluding them (but rather including roughly another third of your player base, at least)
This discussion is good, because I almost ALWAYS play killer and would like to believe I am in the majority, but the fact is that there will always be 4 survivors for every 1 killer.
Think of it like this: if 25% of survivors quit, we would not have a single match (only 3 survivors for every killer would play) and killers would wait to fill their q.
If 25% of killers quit, there would be increased queues for survivors, not killers.
Long killer qs means there isn't an abundance of survivors. How can we get more people to play survivor?....
-
@AkiTheKitten said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743262#Comment_743262
But nerf all the viable Killers and they'll stop playing, making there be less lobbies
See my post above. It explains why serving survivor players or those that play both is in BHVRs best interest.
-
@GrootDude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743259#Comment_743259
Haven’t you ever considered the large amount of players playing both sides?
There are a lot of folks that play "both sides" but that is irrelevant. At any given moment when this game is active, 80% of the players are playing survivor.
there are more survivor characters, and the monetization scheme MUST be geared toward them, because, at any given moment, 80% of the player base HAS to be playing survivor.
all players will fall into 1 of 3 camps:
-killer "main"
-survivor "main"
-plays both killer and survivor
by marketing to survivor players, you are marketing to you majority player base at any given time (80%, which includes survivor mains and those that play both...so at MINIMUM 66%...this assumes a full third are killer players only)
people that play this game only as killer MUST be in the minority (or there would be no matches).
This is why logically, bhvr must cater to survivors for marketing. I am not blaming them in the least (they have to pay the bills) but would rather people understand that this is the case. Understanding this can allow folks to better understand the choices this company makes
-
You are correct. Based on recent changes, it is safe to get that moris will get a
nerfrework.Moris frustrate survivors. If something frustrates survivors, it frustrates 4/5 of the player base and frustrated gamers won't spend money.
-
@Walker_of_the_fog_96 said:
Today nurse...tomorrow spirit and billy 😈😈😈😈
Yes. Because frustrated survivor players will not spend money on items in this game.
And who frustrated survivors the most?
Nursespirit... -
@GrootDude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/743217#Comment_743217
Killers buy cosmetics too
By pure numbers, survivors MUST outrank killer players by 4:1.
If this were not the case, we would not have games.
-
Where do you think the money comes from for this game?
By logic: survivors must outrank killer players 4:1.
Do you think frustrated survivors will spend money on cosmetics and more background (or whatever paid materials they offer)?
So now you can see why nurse must be nerfed.
On deck: spirit. Guaranteed.
-
FYI: survivor cosmetics are a huge money maker for this game (as you can see from the store options), so these nurse changes actually make sense when you consider where money is being spent.
(For those that need it spelled out: if survivor players aren't having fun, they won't spend money on cosmetics)
-
The recent queue times, progress regression and these changes have me playing other games, not to mention another disappointing "halloween" event (if you can even call it that).
No big deal;something will eventually draw me back into this game (it always does), but for now ill spend time and money elsewhere.
-
@Kilmeran said:
@Attackfrog A fairly accurate explanation.
Also, let's not forget that his fans fell for the biggest scam in publishing history: Rushing into stores to buy a book, one chapter at a time.
I had friends that worked at Waldenbooks back then. We privately laughed at those people.
I feel like I post a lot about my distaste for him and his "writing", but I really feel there is so much good horror/thriller work out there and he gets so much credit for it (and money). I wish people would just forget King and seek out those other writers.
And when you compare his to the originals, it just makes me gag how bad it is.
But then again...we live in a world where Twilight movies rake in billions...it's no wonder brilliant authors are ignored!
-
Id break all survivors legs so they couldn't run.
Id dull all killer weapons so it took 3 hits to down, just to read all the post game salt.
-
Killing
-
@ImKateDenson said:
Can we stop posting complain in this forum ? Pleeeeeease. Your post is useless all you are looking for with that is get salt where there is too mutch of it in this forum
sounds exactly like the op...but the opposite perspective.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
never. get over it. bhvr is afraid of hurting killer's feelings.
losing to NOED (aka the easiest perk to counter/disable): git better. You don't even have to be "gud" to counter noed...just have a modicum of common sense and you evade it.
-
This is why NOED is a well balanced perk.
Half the time it never gets popped.
Half the time it pops and survivors cleanse within 30 secs or shortly after the first down.
And the third half the time I can actually down 1-2 survivors with it...or entity willing, I can camp a hook after exit gates go and down all of them turning a 1k into a 4k.
PS: yes, three halves make a whole. Math is important!
-
Stephen is great. He takes fantastic stories that were written on a higher level by other authors and dumbs them down to the lowest common denominator for mass audiences.
Look at the Dark Tower series, Misery, Room 1408 (or whatever room it was). All just dumbed down copies of other, more complex (and FAR better written) works.
Others are more original but make very little sense and include odd/weird things for the sake of throwing the reader off...when in actuality it makes LITTLE sense. Most of his works seem like he made up the rules as he went. Plot stuck? It's an alien! Cool phenomenon? Explained by odd metaphysics! It often starts with a cool idea, but instead of fleshing it out in an intelligent way, King will add a cop out (aliens) or add something that makes absolutely no sense and adds no coherency (look at the new Netflixmovie Tall Grass for an examole...which I sadly sat througb).
Stephen King is the McDonald's of horror. MANY people will gobble it up and love it, truly believing it is actually good food (writing) because it is cheap and easy to access. Those that have experienced the originals or something more complex will pass it up. Like McDonald's, he creates garbage disguised as something real. And our culture is worse off because of it.
But it will still make TONS of money because there are 8 billion people in the world. They can't all be thinkers.
-
She is in a great spot.
Takes skill to learn.
Terrible when played by a noob.
Beads are fine: Good survivors and swf will coordinate and spot the environmental signs that give it away. Bad survivors will fall for tricks (fits with her learning curve)
She's in a great spot for advanced killers and works TERRIBLY for new players.
She is a great example of the learning curve for this game.
-
Maybe they leveled him and returned to their faves?
-
Yeah I was hoping this weekend after bloodhound to be able to get into a game.
Tried 3 times today(saturday) and waited 10 mins in killer q before saying F it and playing another game.
DbD must REALLY not want my $$. With Halloween events going on in just about every game...lol I'll spend my time and money in those instead. The developers must be rolling in so much cash that they don't need to compete with other games.
-
There should definitely be two leagues: one with ranks and cook rewards for "tryhards" and the other for casual players.
I hate going against "pro" players in a very non-pro game.
-
@GrootDude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/735859#Comment_735859
I liked the Harry Potter books but hated the movies
Same! It just proves: books ruin movies! NEVER read books because it will just ruin the movie!!!