Ecstasy
Ecstasy
About
- Username
- Ecstasy
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
Same
-
@IronKnight55 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577173#Comment_2577173
You're right... Charlotte is a little uglier. Mikaela is the second ugliest thing in the game. I definitely wouldn't want her in my bedroom. Unless she was wearing a bag to cover up her face. She has a nice bod 😆
Ah don't worry about all that. Safe to say you've zero risk of ever running into her or any other women in your bedroom at all.
🏌️
-
I honestly think the original rumors were true that cakes weren't going to stack, and only reason BHVR caved so easily and switched was because they had this insidious revelation that it didn't matter if there were bonuses or not as long as they massively cut the survivor side drop rate.
Their obliviousness at understanding the root issues (and at reading the room) creates this cyclical pattern of frustration and disappointment where every attempted fix/improvement/solution comes at the expense of whatever other issues introduced. Even the fires they actually put out never end up producing any goodwilll when it's still smothered by the smoke of every other fires that sparked next to it. That's why even trivial little problems and complaints actually end up being a big deal. It's never about the little issue itself anymore, each new matter reeks of that accumulated resentment left festering.
Yet they're actually content with this status quo. Somehow they think that making any profit is success, while the idea is actually making maximum profit. There's a major opportunity cost incurred when your active playerbase is so miserable. Crazy thing is goodwill is actually insanely cheap. There's just a threshold value for gains, yet they keep treating it like some incremental addition they can just minmax from a space of maximum greed with petty token gestures. Nah man. ######### builds up.
Gotta protect that "BP economy" though lol.
-
FOR A PREVIEW OF TONIGHT'S TOP STORIES:
*COMPANIES HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE GARBAGE
*INDIVIDUALS HAVE RIGHTS TOO, LIKE CALLING COMPANIES GARBAGE FOR THINGS THEY DON'T LIKE.
*LOCAL MAN'S CONFUSING RANT REVEALS TOTAL IGNORANCE OF RIGHTS AS A CONCEPT.
NEWS AT 11.
-
Terrible idea.
There's already cooldown if you don't end up using it right away before you can get it ready again, so you're already required to time it perfectly. It's not easy power spam ready to go.
Since you move at 95% speed while its up, there's a huge incentive to hit asap since you're losing distance with every moment. And if you do pull it too late, then they've already turned the corner or vaulted safely making it majorly punishing to miss.
You'd just be crippling a power that's already better to ignore for m1 most of the time anyway.
-
I'm desperately hoping that whatever fix requires them to remove the so-called "entity influence" they slapped all over that map, modifying something inherently beautiful and well designed into this chaotic clusterfuck of vibrant orange puke and obnoxious bulk.
Midwitch at least gets to look insanely cool. Give RPD that much.
-
BHVR's cosmetic pricing actually showcases a rarely seen measure of decency and self-awareness from them.
Any normal company--interested only in max profits--would simply sell their abundance of useless cosmetics for trivial prices relative to their key goods in order to prey upon the collector mentality. The strategically lower costs & collection atmosphere facilitate far greater purchases, from a far greater market segment, for far greater revenue. But we're not dealing with just any company here.
BHVR's key strategy (charging $10-15 for these regularly released novelty textures, on par with what game-modders toss together over the weekend and release freely in other games) is actually quite noble.
See, that's a pricing range that makes sure you're doing what's best for *you*. They're numbers that jump from the page right into your ear, and whisper: "Welp, $15 gets you one novelty "legendary" cosmetic in this game you've played... and played, and played, to almost no change over the years... orrrrr that's literally hundred of hours of BRAND NEW EXPERIENCES! Heard about Valheim yet? Ohh so ambitious!!!"
BHVR reminds you that there's a lot more to life than DBD.
It takes guts for any company to push customers away from its products for their own good like that.
-
@Astrian said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2272633#Comment_2272633
None of them. You and I both know you don't use that vocabulary in common conversation yet you're using it now to make your bad take sound better.
Why try to make your bad take sound smarter when you can just not have a bad take? I'm just calling you out
I've heard it all before https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_obeR1OIm8
But no bubba. That's just another asinine assumption from an ego too fragile to reconcile its own limitations among a universe of experiences and perspectives outside itself.
I've got a hundred+ posts on this forum. Feel free to read as many as you like, and do get back to telling me who I am and all the things you know about me. Each post was constructed in my own voice; each presents my actual personality; and each conveys my genuine thought process, and--golly gee willickers--even my day-to-day diction.
You're still applying your sample size of one--a sample-size of self--to everyone and everything. I'm just me homeslice. There's nothing special about you. Except maybe the education required.
-
@Astrian said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2272532#Comment_2272532
Put the thesaurus away, using big words you saw on your word of the day calendar doesn't make your bad take any better.
Keys are not ruining your games. You don't have to end every game in a 4K. It is okay to lose.
LOL. Which words did you have to look up there champ?
Try reading more.
-
@Brokenbones said:
My speculation is they only nerfed it because they couldn't figure out a way to make it not delete the Vaccine item
That would be straight from the BHVR playbook, so you might be onto something there.
-
Gee or maybe they went from "oh we're still gonna nerf keys, still gonna nerf keys" to removing the one hard counter to them in this ######### game.
And people DO use the perk. You're making an asinine assumption in the first place about something that's evidenced to be true, but honestly that's not even your motivating factor for this god awful thread anyhow. You're actually only upset because other people are upset about something to which you're indifference, and the world demands order, ergo their concerns are irrelevant and petty. Hence your own "spoiled children blah blah blah" with far more grandiose childishness.
-
Sprint Burst, because I get winded after sprinting for 3 seconds too
XD
-
@Shroompy said:
They never said anything about nerfing mori's again. They said they wanted to make mori's apart of the game and make the killer earn their mori's, and not just getting them for playing an offering.
Here, let me make it simpler if you don't understand: YOU GET REWARDED FOR DOING GOOD!
Your interpretation seems willfully naïve.
In no reality would they ever describe the current implementation of moris as "toxic" and make any sort of adjustments that actually improves the utility and value killers get from them.
They're making a declaration to adjust a tool that's already been depowered heavily, rendering it even weaker and/or useless in any situation where a killer might need to change their fortune instead of providing flashy overkill.
Despite the community talking point, not everything in games design should revolve around "earned" and "rewarded for doing well." The other end of effective game promotes means of catching up when behind, meaningful choices/strategy, and an economy of doubling-down on success as well as insurance against failure.
(That's how it works with everything people bring into the game already. None of those heals and flashlights are any more "earned", they're just manifestations of effective game design that promote player agency and randomness/uncertainty/variation.)
What's actually egregious about the whole thing isn't that they want to change moris even more. It's just that they're even concerned with moris at all right now when they've done ######### all about keys except introduce a bug that made them obscenely common and even more obnoxious than ever.
While people argue about this game being "survivor sided" or "killer sided," I think that whole debate is a fools errand. What I'd actually argue is that BHVR is simply negligent about addressing the killer gameplay experience. They clearly perceive one role in this game as their bread-and-butter, creating a (conscious or not) priority to quality-of-life adjustments for survivor gameplay to the point of detriment to this game as a whole. It's a damn shame.
Onward we go. Roll out the anniversary special packed to the brim with (random ass) streamers (I ain't ever heard of) running the same epic circles and laughing it up. *Killer footage not found*
-
@PanicSquid said:
Oscar Wilde wrote something to the extent of "Give a man a mask and he'll show you who he truly is"
The relative anonymity of the internet allows people who are toxic to be toxic without having to face the ramifications of their actions. If you said some of those things to a person on the street, you might get hit for that behavior, people around you might stop associating with you, you could lose your job, etc.
But here on the internet, the worst that happens is that you get banned. So if they don't care to keep playing the game, if they think they can get away with it, or they have an alt account to fall back to, in any of these cases they face little consequence for their actions.
DBD is inherently antagonistic with the gameplay, the 4v1 can lend itself to the mob mentality where someone feels like they have the okay to be toxic because they are in the more numerous group. While the 1v4 can lend itself to the underdog mentality where one feels like they can be toxic to the people because they outnumber them, and clearly they must be the bullies. All of these are intensified if the person involved lost and doubly so if the behavior of the opposition could be deemed rude or underhanded.
Or maybe I'm just spouting nonsense? I'm not a therapist, I'm not qualified to understand why people do what they do.
I like you. Very astute.
-
I was planning on buying the doctor one before I learned you couldn't mix and match. Definitive deal breaker for me.
Oh well.
-
How?
THEYRE FREAKING GIGANTIC
Still, I wish it was a toggle. I miss the button mash struggle system.... since I long ago set my controller to turbo and only have to hold the button. XD
-
LOL
-
I just tried it out, and it didn't even stop the timer when I was being healed (which I thought was suppose to happen) making it a oneshot perk and way less useful than an exhaustion perk in its slot if you're already running other stuff you like.
-
@justbecause said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2161382#Comment_2161382
Tombstone piece the one he can mori you immediately with
That's both of those add-ons. You didn't specifiy which you thought was broken or whether it was both.
-
Awesome change :-)
-
@Crowman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2158798#Comment_2158798
You shouldn't be healing yourself under hook. That's a very risky play when that's the last known location the killer knows you were at.
True that, though they didn't really specify under the hook only, and, truth be told, it's pretty much the same scenario even if you're going at least as far as the the next hook spawn to find some decent hiding spot (assuming there's any to find).
Without iron-will, chances are that any killer heading back that way still pinpoints you based on the sounds alone. Hell, even when you do run it, there's still those times where the killer just happens to circle around your hiding spot and catches you based on blood, sheer luck, or game sense anyway.
You can run off farther, but the farther you go means a lot more exposure out in the open with a giant glowing trial of scratch-marks and that means an obvious, definitive direction you're headed for the killer to search. Longer to start the heal means longer to finish the heal too, Plus, if you don't know where the killer is, you also run the risk of smacking right into a killer who actually WASN'T out to tunnel you initially, but a freebie is a freebie. (Still, I've found this to be the best alternative to roll the dice on, since you can usually tell if the killer is coming that way or around before you pick the hiding spot--and if not then the DS will be active at least--where you can then start the heal in relative safety.)
Meanwhile, all those circumstances are time & location dependent, where your choices really relate to how much lead time you've got from the unhook until the killer reaches that area again. And sometimes those initially safe heal locations end up super dangerous when some d-bag Dwight leads the killer back that way, so the killer naturally switches to the easy, loud, stationary target with a heal at 95% and DS gone. :-)
The point of it all is really the same: this perk you're taking that's already situationally useful in trials has its utility sliced down even more by all sorts of situational factors where you'll still end up deactivating it prematurely (sometimes even accidentally... grumble grumble.... stupid limited button bindings) and still vulnerable to tunneling without even having recovered that full health state, so its ultimate value was the same as not taking it at all. You're tunneled out of the match without much opportunity to really play all the same.
The new DS really is garbage, but I've run into too many killers tunneling right off the hook lately if someone isn't an obsession to ignore it.
I actually never even use to even run the damn thing, yet now I find myself having to run this ######### watered down version for that minimal practical application just because I can't count on an obsession in solo-queue. I resent it so, so, so, so ######### much. It doesn't even do a good-job at the one thing its suppose to be doing.
As with so many mechanics in this ######### game, the whole healing deactivation thing is no big deal for SWF to work around (since they can ensure the unhooker stays around for the heal), but punishing as hell for solo queue where you're largely dependent on yourself.
-
Absolutely agree with the OP... but I'd go even further than just a 2nd usage and say that it also shouldn't de-active for healing or unhooks either. (Though reiterate it absolutely should be deactivated when gens are done).
I play solo queue 95% of the time. I NEVER ran DS before the nerf. NEVER. I thought it was cheap and didn't want it.
Yet now I find myself NEEDING to run it now on the off-chance that the killer is a mega prick just tunneling off the hook (that, indeed, has increased as well) since I can't depend on other players in solo to run an obsession perk. And THAT is absolute bullshit.
I ######### resent having to run a perk I never ######### wanted in the first place.
I resent the minimal practical value it provides to me. And I resent this situation far, far, far, far, far, far ######### more than just leaving the perk as is and me needing to work around it as killer. Because hey--great news--the genuinely most abusive usage of DS is the one thing they DIDN'T change. If you've still got it, it's a guaranteed free escape in the endgame where you're definitively not being tunneled. But good thing its that at least, because that's the only selling point that keeps it viable in its present state.
It's insane that this "anti-tunneling" perk is most effective for the cheap guaranteed escape at the end of a match you've basically finished playing, yet does absolutely nothing in those early-game scenarios where you're actually getting tunneled out of the game without much of a chance to even play because you were unlucky enough to get 2 seconds into a self-heal before the killer ended up spotting you again.
Contemptible.
-
@Anara said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2152459#Comment_2152459
Ok so reading you, its my fault to playing as I should, but the others who just dont play the game at all, like trolls are right.
Cool...
Its nice to read that Im wrong to try to play objectives but the Claudette just afking in a corner is right.
I just cant read that type of comments anymore.
For ######### sake. Try reading it again with the actual intent of understanding what I'm saying even if you don't agree with it.
I don't know how I could write and elaborate so much only for you to gloss over everything with such a ridiculous, faulty, and single-minded interpretation of the many, many points I outlined. Where did I EVER say that Claudette was good? Did you miss the part directly stating that what they did was ######### and stupid? First real paragraph. And what does that ONE ASPECT have to do with EVERYTHING ELSE that people are telling you here?
If you actually tried to engage the specifics here, you might be forced to reconcile that your OTHER conclusions are the hypocrisy we're talking about. You're so caught up on "######### EVERYONE ELSE!" that you see your initial frustrations as a blank check where you can't be wrong about anything else after that.
- How are you not in control of your own decision to keep playing or not at any given point?
- Knowing the actual definition of "hostage holding" now, do you understand why your scenario ISN'T that?
- How is the killer playing any different than you by playing safe and trying to ensure they win?
- So why do you feel justified to DC, which ######### the killer over, when your team's inactivity isn't their fault either?
- And if you want out of the game, why not just get out legitimately by letting yourself be hooked then?
- How doe DC'ing ever HURT the survivors you're mad at? What's the difference from their POV at all there?
Do you get it yet?
These are the specific issues raised beyond "my team wasn't helping!!!". Specific issues that should lead you to realize "Okay, DC'ing would be a ######### move there too."
But hey--if all those points are actually non-sensical--you can easily refute the logic with your own counter points instead of shutting down to make it some all-or-nothing situation where you are either absolutely right or absolutely wrong.
-
@Anara said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2151903#Comment_2151903
Dude I blame the Claudette and the Kate more for not playing and searching a hatch than wasnt spawned already.
Why are you all focusing on the fact I blamed the killer for not chasing in the 3 gen area ?
I BLAME MY TEAM MORE !
Should I say it again ? Yes.
I BLAME MY TEAM MORE THAN THE KILLER.
You still don't get it. Knowing "but I blame them too!" isn't the issue... it's that YOU (and only you) held yourself hostage in that game.
Yeah, its not a fun situation--and what your team did was ######### & stupid--but being HELD HOSTAGE specifically means a game where you're basically FORCED to DC in order to leave. (For example: the killer bodyblocking everyone in the basement, or survivors hiding in lockers, instead of ever trying to win the game). "Held hostage" doesn't mean "games I can't progress without probably losing".
You're the one who spent 40 minutes tapping a gen and then running off to safety before you risked being downed. You chose to play it safe, and did it again, then again, and again.... and again... and again....
THAT'S JUST YOU REFUSING TO LOSE. And you know what? That's perfectly fine. That's all the killer was doing too there. Playing it slow and safe, waiting you out in a war of attrition, hoping they'll be able to down you eventually by waiting for you to take too big of a risk without sacrificing their own positioning (your health states vs their generator progress in this case). Same way you're probably they get bored/tired and finally commit to a chase again, allowing your friend a chance to complete the generator.
But what's ######### up here is that you're looking back at this thinking "NEXT TIME IM GONNA DC!!!!"
######### is that? Any DC is totally uncalled for there. Why would you punish the killer for playing the exact same way you were at that point by taking it slow & steady? That's objectively the best decision for both sides if you're patient enough and want to win badly enough.
If you want out faster, then you just start taking bigger risks to win, or simply walk up to a nearby hook and point. Worst case scenario? They slug you and you're stuck there for 4 more minutes. (And that's still shorter than the DC penalty too)
For the record too:
I'm not perfect and totally beyond DC'ing. This game gets me tilted at times too---and I've done more than my fair share of DCing while stressing some rough challenges & achievements. I just won't delude myself with rationalizations "it's totally fair here cause...". Nah man. It's typically a ######### move on my part, and not the best-self I should be.
But, also, I just cannot even relate to how anyone could DC or even complain about 3-gens based on my own experiences with DBD. Lately I've become infuriated over how often I'm forced to ######### de-pip because either (A) some other survivor just bitches out and ######### DC's or suicides needlessly early-on, (B) the killer is one of those sweat-lord jerk-asses who just tunnels you out of the match at 5 gens or slugs the whole team without even a CHANCE to safety pip. Man. At least I get to PLAY the game in a 3-gen. (And to be honest, actually find them incredibly fun on both sides, though maybe that's related to being able to just play for real.)
-
@ShamelessPigMain said:
Why the hell did they give Hag Nipples
Why do you get nipples and not her?
-
@JayDoesGames said:
They’ve done a job job. She actually looks like she’s supposed to: a young female and not a angry teenage boy or someone much older than she’s supposed to be.
Whos to say she's not suppose to look like an angsty teenager (boy if you wanna be like that)?
Like why does every female character have to fit some perfectly symmetrical magazine standard?
Meg is fine the way she is. I like that's shes that way.
-
Stop posting no content threads for ######### sake.
-
@Zixology said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2143905#Comment_2143905
If that were true, then it's impossible to hold the game hostage because you can just DC.
You're misinterpreting that. They mean legitimately end the game.
As a matter of fact, any game that cannot end without you DCing is the fundamental qualification for "hostage holding" as far as the developers/rules are concerned.
It's not about games you cannot progress without losing. Its about games you cannot progress at all.
-
@TauNkosi said:
Other than the obvious such as tunneling or face camping. Comment your personal killer grievances and see how many of your fellow survivors can relate!
I'll go first.
Killers seemingly completely ignoring a specific survivor when there's no obsession. Have you ever had that one game where you or another survivor go the entire time without getting hooked? Every one else is on death hook and you're standing there like, "Why is the killer ignoring me?" Even when you try to take aggro, the killer still goes after the other survivors. It makes the game a little boring when it happens.
Can anyone relate?
That giant neon "chase me!" sign you're broadcasting might just have an even bigger, flashing, red "DON'T" glowing atop.
That's not necessarily your exact situation here, but if you encounter that sort of thing frequently here are some of the reasons that can tend to happen:
When it comes to actually baiting the killer, a lot of survivors make it super obvious what they're doing. And obviously if the other team wants you doing something, that's almost certainly something you don't want to be doing.
Meanwhile, if you're too eager about following them and trying to deflect agro, well, why in the world would the killer chase the survivor whose already chasing them and that's 2 players locked down from doing gens in one move?
Even when the opportunity does look organic, a lot of survivors are simply too greedy about putting any "bait" in their baiting. Just showing "hey I'm here too!" isn't gonna cut it when you're clearly holding enough distance and positioned well enough to loop them before they might even get that first hit.
You don't necessarily need to take a hit, but if you're not putting yourself in a position where that's a real possibility then the killers likely to recognize that too and stay course. Though, if they're chasing someone injured already---actually, you might just need to take a hit there for them to consider switching.
Ultimately though, sometimes there's just not a lot you can do since there's just far too much incentive for the killer to chase their target. Could be because the other player was a dick and BMing, so the killer legit doesn't care about you. Or maybe its just pure tunneling as a calculated decision since eliminating players from the game is the absolute best way of turning the tables as a killer. Or maybe they're just a dick.
Sometimes you can MAYBE lure them away by taking a full dive in hopes of buying a little time, but I can't say that's a good play in many circumstances. Chances are they'll just keep going after the other player anyway, even ideally you're probably buying 10 seconds before they head that way again.
-
@Nathan13 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2132948#Comment_2132948
DS was already nerfed to the ground so that's not happening.
(Welp, going full circle here, but worth it if we get there in the end...)
Hrm. Lets say there's some sort of balancing compromise we could make then?
Oh, I've got it. We simply eliminate those abusive no-win situation in end-game (by, for example, having DS deactivate when gens finish) and we widen the practical application of DS for recovery situations (say, some 2nd use and/or removing the healing & unhooking disqualifiers).
This way you're not covered by the so-called "tunneling" protection even at times where you're literally the only survivor left in the game. Meanwhile, its a much better safety-net for people to hold-on in situations stacked against them---whereas currently if your team starts moving to recover and needs you to heal (or even just start the healing) that's a trade-off decision since that opens the flood-gates to being slammed by the killer who totally interrupts the heal and claims without any DS value, for a situation that's really giving you the worst of both worlds.
The altered DS ends up even better at the real goal, with improved ability to delay players from being pushed out of the game prematurely. Yet its no longer the BS free escape for people who've already played the match. Best though: it'll especially stop synergizing as the ultimate free escape for players who largely CHOOSE not to play that match.... players who think slamming gens as fast as humanly possible while dodging all the normal gameplay interaction actually entitles them to escape at all.
The mechanics shouldn't be encouraging players to just tunnel gens so heavily that their pip ends up entirely contingent on cheesing points in the end-game by delaying the gates from popping, where plays can swarm the killer in relative safety until deciding its gg time. That's just BS. It's playing into the same false entitlement that gets people complaining about matters of "tunneling" and "camping" in the freaking end-game at all. Their whole frame of reference is so hilariously divorced from any meaningful context of those terms that you might as well just declare "GENS DONE = WE WON" and slam down the survivor rule book. It's best to restructure gameplay and rewards to step further and further away from all that jazz as time goes on.
-
Hell, I'd honestly be fine with 2x use AND removing any healing/unhook actions from the list of disqualifying conditions provided that they actually just make DS deactivate once the gates are powered.
They did a good job by finally addressing DS, but I've come around to recognize that they over-compensated by removing too much in-game viability while somehow overlooking the remaining end-game abuse.... which was really the part about DS that always felt like the biggest BS in the world.
Anyone saved with that last minute unhook/deliverance/kobe still gets their free escape. If those gates are open, you're totally powerless to stop any DS survivor from leaving. You've seriously just gotta watch them slowly crawl their way to victory on their belly, or you decide to actually HELP THEM by eating the stun so they can sprint out since it ends the game that much faster for you.
Whether you know its coming or not, there's nothing you can do as counter-play. You're always the helpless killer who can't stop someone literally bleeding to death from escaping their grasp because you can't even slam your foot in their back to hold them in place for 60 seconds.
-
It's a matter of perspective.
As others already pointed out: if you don't think that gen-rushing is a thing, then clearly tunneling and camping aren't really things either. When a team can't work around those strategies, that's always their own failure.
If you genuinely never complain or care about that stuff either--given all relentlessly pursue your own objectives in the most logical & optimal fashion for the circumstances, even where it denies other players a chance at fun--well, okay, that's fair.
As long as you're consistent with your logic, it's not something anyone can definitively argue as right or wrong beyond their own POV too.
My own POV?
When your match strategy is totally contingent on pressuring gens as quickly as possible with some expectation of cheesing the chase/altruism points needed in the end-game where you're free to swarm the killer in relatively safely... you're absolutely gen-rushing. It doesn't take BNPs. It's about mindless, robotic efficiency even when you're thriving. And it really does suck. It's no different from killers denying you the chance at any real game by tunneling you right off the hook. One side guarantees the other to de-pip from that loss too, while they still usually (but barely) secure their own pip from the win.
Personally, I want the games to be games. I find that occasional sub-optimal (aka fun/fair/empathetic) decisions tend to create far more enjoyable games even if that sometimes costs me games I'd otherwise win. Hell, that's kind of the point: letting the scales tilt back a bit to provide more interesting matches.
As a survivor, if we're making great time and in a good position, sure, I'll take some time to open a chest or do dull totems. As a killer, if I've got some serious pressure built up, yeah I'm going to ignore the logical targets to go after someone I haven't hooked yet. Sometimes I'll even avoid death hook and just slug so they've got a chance for recovery and more gameplay while the slug will still buy me pressure since someone's got to lift them up. (Especially if its a game where I came out hard and heavy--double hooking them early--where I could've played more relaxed).
I don't demand that everyone else plays this way, but I get zero value out of relentlessly winning as quickly as possible just for the sake of it. Might as well be doing any arbitrary thing for the sake of doing whatever arbitrary thing quickly. Dishwashing speed champion here I come. That's the sort of value winning alone holds to me.
So I tend to play this game with the goal of double pipping when I can. It makes sure I've got to balance how well I'm doing with giving the other side a real chance at playing this game. It's a challenge of its own. As frustrating as the emblem system is in some respects (and the your vulnerability of depending on other players participation), it's also something I greatly respect for how it strives to push players towards making the game itself more enjoyable.
-
The chat filter allows them to maintain an illusion of being proactive about toxicity while doing literally nothing.
It's basically security theater. You block the no-no words---whether used in toxic communication or a perfectly healthy expression of one's self and personality--so no one can make specific reports saying "they called me mr no-no" anymore.
Of course, it doesn't matter whether that's censored or a different term entirely. Communication is about intent, not the medium. That actual toxicity still passes through unimpeded to create the exact same conseqeuences. The only thing you've done is block that very specific medium while also blocking that medium in a way that limits the forms of legitimate self-expression too.
But you get to SAY you're doing something now. Because no one gets told to suicide in chat anymore. Instead they just read things like "Kiss Your Self" and once they figure out what that means, well, toxicity accomplished all the same. They've got to take a stance removing/punsihing toxic users to actually remove any toxicity. Everything else is more security theater.
-
@Bangarang said:
I really like Ethan and wouldn’t be mad at all if he was the survivor, but he’s definitely not the only character that’d fit in DBD. How do Leon, Chris, Claire and Jill (to name a few) not fit?
-
@DerpyPlayz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2118901#Comment_2118901
If you just defined what cheating is then this would be alot easier and alot shorter.
Putting any abstract and relative concept into a rigid definition wouldn't be easier or shorter. And if it is, then its certainly not as accurate.
-
I mean, objectively, it's not cheating. As you said, it's not prohibited, so it's not really cheating by definition. The developers have classified it as acceptable & encourage those players and playstyle.
It does, however, clearly undermine the basic gameplay assumptions and conditions in ways that are materially significant still. Basically, yeah, it's pretty damn dense to pretend voice-communication doesn't fundamentally alter a game where you're normally can't even type a message to any other play saying that you need a rescue, stay on gen, trap right there, etc. or any of the potentially huge bits of information exchanged by players regularly in the most casual usage of voice-communication. Even those sorts of little things on their own attribute to the sort of mistakes and miscalculations that spiral out into major consequences for the survivor side.
You can't really eliminate all the chaos and confusion the game depends upon and say its the same game. It is actually very similar to someone using perma-wallhack software in that way. Neither are an instant win, but its unbalanced information that dramatically alters their chances beyond what they should be and eliminates all the normal errors that would constitute normal gameplay.
Really it's hard to ignore how VC has as much impact as most forms of cheating in most other arenas. It's all very much a steroids equivalent. They're forms of performance enhancement that render teams--of any given skill or starting level--that much better than they would be without it. Meanwhile the significance of that boost is largely a function of their own starting skill and effectiveness at utilizing the boost to its full capacity. It can basically be roid-raging "break this game in half!" boosting, or it can be "but i just need that littttttttttttle edge!" boosting, and everything in-between... which just calls itself the latter anyhow regardless of the edge. (This being the process of how people convince themselves cheating is acceptable in any iteration).
Again though, that's all allowed and okay here. Unlike steroids or hacks.
So what do you do about that contradiction?
My clarified definition is "de-facto cheating", because, well, that's what you're left with. It's not cheating so far as the rules are concerned (that being differentiated as "de jure cheating"), however it's also something hard to look at--as a logical, objective person who understands the game mechanics--and end up concluding that the average match allowing VC would be roughly similar to that exact same match if it occurred without VC. There's an indisputable--and rather massive--edge fundamentally altering the sort of game and techniques you're up against.
The phrasing "de-facto cheating" is a direct acknowledgement that it is indeed allowed, but a reminder that perhaps it shouldn't be--or at least that it should be incorporated and balanced. It's an acknowledgement of being within the rules, while also noting the function parallel steroids in baseball or wall-hacks in counter-strike.
To propose another type of "de-facto cheating" example: I suppose it's along the lines of recognizing how it would still be still cheating in-effect regardless of whether Uno added some written rule into the game where as long as someone is getting up to pee (and only pee, not grab a beer or anything) and your name is Dan, then you can look at the other player's cards. Its like... okay, yeah official rule... but c'mon. That's not--you just can't say that's the same damn game. It doesn't vibe with its own essence and expression.
The idea is similar here, except--instead of Dan bribing Uno Von Unomaker to add that rule--Dan is a bunch of streamers and cosmetic purchasers who also demand the capability of playing with friends (+the massive booster doing that with voice-coms adds). Thus, BHVR has their pupils turn into a bunch of spinning $$$ signs start in the style of a cartoon character while their tongues roll onto the ground like an unfurling carpet and they mutter "sure sure anything you betcha sure," and thus balance is born.
-
@TTV_WAWAbyWibWib said:
There is very little toxicity in DBD. Most people who have ANY experience in other games at all that aren't strictly single player, or who own consoles that play games that aren't DBD are already used to WAY worse than we get here. I'm sure it won't be a problem
Subjectivity is a thing.
-
There's literally no solid arguments for why killers shouldn't get some stacked 25% post-match BP bonus per SWF member, and upwards of a dozen great reasons why they should implement that bonus. (Most of all: the facts it would help boost killer players during the most popular SWF hours where the extra haste has killers dodging---forcing even more imbalanced MM, exacerbating the issue onto lower ranked killers until they stop playing--when this would benefit all players, smoothing queue times & balance in one incredibly easy solution).
It's objectively a great move for this game
So its probably never going to happen.
-
@Harold_Shipman said:
Imagine the anticlimax if the survivor is the guy who locks himself in the back of the lorry at the beginning of RE3 and the killer was plant 42
Okay well now thats exactly what I want.
-
@Bangarang said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2114901#Comment_2114901
Oh my God. You can’t just go around asking people what fetch is. 🤦🏼♂️
Ugh.
STOP TRYING TO MAKE FETCH HAPPEN
-
@Dustin said:
I'll level with you being part of the Resident Evil community it actually has quite a few toxic elitist in it so you should honestly be prepared for that.
The community will constantly bash on anything where the franchise doesn't go back to its roots or when it does a spin off. I imagine a lot of them will hop in DBD and complain that Capcom did a crossover while still playing it.
Hrm?
I don't even know what toxicity would look in the resident evil "community" though I sure know its face in DBD. Despite me being old balls--and those balls been gaming my whole life since before OG RE--Dead by Daylight is the only game I've ever found toxic enough to consider that a notable definition or impacting my own desires to keep playing or not. I cannot possible imagine what there is to worry about going from B to A here.
But people in communities love and hate all sorts of things--especially parts of that community--because people aren't one big nebulous blob where one represents all. A lot of the "them" always do a lot of everything.
Honestly, I don't even get how that's your impression of the larger communities stance on change. There are all kinds of opinions, but the fact is that RE has even more side and spin-off titles than it does main entries, and even those main entries include radical change. For example: RE7 wasn't even the first first-person Resident Evil (That was Gun Survivor back on PS1, which was terrible btw and didn't even work with my lightgun, but I loved it.) Meanwhile two of the most popular entries RE4 and RE7 were monumentally different from everything that came before yet preserved the same core ideals in a way that brought new life into the franchise in ways that were clearly repeated in their immediate sequels.
I really can't think of a franchise that has mutated as much as Resident Evil and maintained its popularity consistently.
-
As far as killer:
We don't know much about Lady D yet, so that's possible for sure (or at least I went into blackout mode after the first trailer dropped since I don't want any surprises taken away), though it feels a bit like doing Salazar from RE4 or Alexia from CV, it's something cool as ice around the release time, but unlikely for legendary potential.
Jack would be a decent fit, but we'd really be pushing it with chainsaw killers.
Lucas is genuinely a serial killer, but they didn't even set him up as real antagonist. Just a hard tease with oh well, DLC.
Nemesis is.... actually... the more I think about it... Nemesis is honestly the best fit for a killer mold since his whole jam is actually ######### with his targets. Compared to Mr. X's smash smash direct to the path, what sets Nemesis apart is personality, and that personal flair where he's gonna ######### with his prey before he slams the fist down.
He's crafty and vicious. He's far more like what they want the killers to be like than some of their own killers based on their lore. It'll be weird not having his iconic weaponry since they're not gonna add a gatling gun, but he's also got his tentacles (including his palm injector one) for an easy attack system.
It's almost certainly gonna be Nemy. He fits the profile/powers/customization compared to the other mutant monsters, but they can still have their escape cake and eat it here.... he's body-type similar enough they can just sell a cosmetic to switch him out for Mr X (based on trends, $50 cosmetic) or even OG Typrent (Legendary one set, so naturally a $250 cosmetic) or hell maybe down the road even a second mutation Birkin (cosmetic prices at ETA: your first born male heir).
As far as survivors:
Ethan is honestly one of the most realistic choices, though hardly iconic and its like we don't even see his face in his games most of the time.
Rebecca too, but seriously who gives a ######### about Rebecca. Sherry would kinda work, but--silly as it sounds--she's a bit too close to Cheryl in some ways to bother adding her to the game. Its weird, but its just true. I'd love Barry, but he's Rebecca category to most people. Honestly so is Shery tough. They've got to go with an iconic somehow.
To be honest, Chris would feel insanely out of place in this game ever since he started taking steroids after running into Wesker in RE:CV (impotence) and we got HARDCORE CHRISS whose whole deal is literally punching ######### boulders in half at the heart of a volcano.
Now that I think about it... most all of the legacy characters would be really out-of-place in DBD. They're such hardcore mother ######### after 15+ resident evil games that its all "oh this again"?". Any of the OG OCs would just blast a red barrel next to The Entity after injecting it with anti-entity virus and activating the self-destruct in its foggy lab where this game is secretly all taking place. Then they'd jet-pack out, zooming past the falling debris while looking back solemnly and being all "the horror... the horror...." like a total badass.
Still, I guess they could get away with a time-plucked Jill from RE1 or Leon/Claire out of RE2. Truth is it doesn't really matter since they'll just sell the cosmetics anyway with different models.
There are a lot of good options, but the most important thing? KILLER GOTTA BE STRONG YO!
Do not do represent my main jam with some limp ass #########. I wanna see "RE KILLER OP!!!" ######### flooding this forum from mother ######### day 0. This outta be the next easy-play/uber-powerful equivalent that all the former Freddy mains jump over to using instead.
Gimmie some "RE:K worse than spirit + nurse combined!!!" level outrage. I don't care what's good for the game. Do not undermine RE-Reputation. You gotta RE-Represent.
I'm already gonna be busy playing REVIII until I know every nook and cranny before this thing comes around, so if this is gonna crush me harder than Nemesis crushed Brad, I'm back trying to speed run it for awhile longer instead.
-
It's going to be Jack and Jill.
(And the map will be a big hill).
-
The amount of "ITS A TACTIC!" posts are already staggering.
DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUH.
That's the OP's whole point. It SHOULDN'T be a tactic because its a bullshit example of emergent gameplay where people are playing the servers rather than the gameplay scenerio.
Players know they can't be grabbed in those circumstances, but it's hardly a matter of skill--it's a matter of dedicated servers making grabs incredibly unreliable. Players are applying that external knowledge of this being a videogame with certain limitations to create in-game circumstances which really shouldn't exist. The killer SHOULD have you based on proximity alone there.
You shouldn't become a tank based from starting/stopping the unhook just because you know you can exploit how this one bugged animation must extend from another which you can cancel.
It's not that you're a dick or a cheater for doing that. Everyone does because its the right play and status quo. They're just saying the devs should change the events so that something that scenario defying isn't a gameplay tactic.
-
@ProfGameAndTalk said:
"You only killed me because of NOED."
I only killed you because I ran a perk in one of my four perk slots to counter your 'Adrenaline'? Uhh, yeah. That's what perks are for. I'm happy to counter your 'Adrenaline' with NOED. If Adrenaline wasn't a thing, then I wouldn't worry about NOED.
That's like a killer saying "You only got away from me because you ran DS/BT/Adrenaline/UB/DH/SB/Lithe/Balanced Landing/any other perk which gets a survivor away from a killer." Yeah, that's what perks are for.
Duuuuude.
I had this match where I was finishing off a chase with an injured survivor when the last gen popped to activate their adrenaline, and my NOED, allowing me to cancel it out for the down I should've had from the chase and the kill.
And they actually raged at me with that classic phrase all the same. Irony is dead.
######### YOU WOULDA BEEN DEAD ANYHOW
-
(Oh I just covered this in another thread. Man. This forum should really start just making mega-threads for ongoing subjects and merging new posts into that so the same discussion isn't rehashed over 100 places.)
NOED is something that can feel like BS, but that's maybe 1% of the matches where its just kinda [BAD WORD] that the last two survivors get wiped out unexpectedly after a good struggle to pop that last gen. 99% of the time though? NOED is 100% the survivors fault.
If you can't take the time away from mindlessly gen-rushing to do a few totems, then at least just take note of the totems you do see so you know where to check when it procs. And DO NOT pop that last gen until you're in a good position with no one on hook already or about to be downed.
Hell, safely popping the last gen is always important. You're the one forcing your teammate into a camping situation when you recklessly remove the killer's last objective to render camping the strongest, most logical, and best play to turn that game around.
Most survivors are super greedy to cross-off generators ASAP with this expectation they can always just make up their other emblem points in the end-game by swarming the killer in relative safety while free to leave if [BAD WORD] gets real. That's straight up hubris. Once you stop considering gens popped as "GGWP!" already, then NOED will stop feeling so unfair all the time. Because it's not. It's actually one of the more balanced things in this game. The entire problem roots back to players feeling entitled to a win at times where they're not.
It's not even hard to handle in-game. You know NOED exists, so just play assuming its coming until you can tell otherwise. Same way as a killer you've got expect things like DS and unbreakable. Though I'm able to see that NOED coming ahead of time at least 9/10 based on the killers playstyle and game sense alone.
Honestly though, if NOED procs when all four survivors are still alive (and lets face it, they usually are against NOED players, with hook states to spare), there's zero grounds to even [BAD WORD] about the perk. It's an easily containable situation even in solo queues. Step it up.
-
NOED is something that can feel like BS, but that's maybe 1% of the matches where its just kinda ######### that the last two survivors get wiped out unexpectedly after a good struggle to pop that last gen. 99% of the time though? NOED is 100% the survivors fault.
If you can't take the time away from mindlessly gen-rushing to do a few totems, then at least just take note of the totems you do see so you know where to check when it procs. And DO NOT pop that last gen until you're in a good position with no one on hook already or about to be downed.
Hell, safely popping the last gen is always important. You're the one forcing your teammate into a camping situation when you recklessly remove the killer's last objective to render camping the strongest, most logical, and best play to turn that game around.
Most survivors are super greedy to cross-off generators ASAP with this expectation they can always just make up their other emblem points in the end-game by swarming the killer in relative safety while free to leave if ######### gets real. That's straight up hubris. Once you stop considering gens popped as "GGWP!" already, then NOED will stop feeling so unfair all the time. Because it's not. It's actually one of the more balanced things in this game. The entire problem roots back to players feeling entitled to a win at times where they're not.
It's not even hard to handle in-game. You know NOED exists, so just play assuming its coming until you can tell otherwise. Same way as a killer you've got expect things like DS and unbreakable. Though I'm able to see that NOED coming ahead of time at least 9/10 based on the killers playstyle and game sense alone.
Honestly though, if NOED procs when all four survivors are still alive (and lets face it, they usually are against NOED players, with hook states to spare), there's zero grounds to even ######### about the perk. It's an easily containable situation even in solo queues. Step it up.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2091108#Comment_2091108
Tapp‘s first name is also David
🤨
Nah. I'm pretty sure its Detective.
-
Midwich kicks ass.
I don't care if there's no snow harvester to run around three times before dropping a pallet. It's consistently offered some of the most fun games I've ever had as both survivor and killer.
Not just the aesthetics (which are ######### amazing though). That whole vertical component is great and a third floor being a nice change of pace. There are so many crazy hiding spots equally as dangers if you're spotted there for measured risks. The breakable walls are actual interesting in the game by having that crazy side passageway, even if killers never open it up since its more pathways, but they totally should because its a freaking survivor flytrap.
It's also the reason we haven't gotten any new maps since then. Everyone ######### on a masterpiece for doing something different even though it wasn't actually broken.
Come at me bro.
-
@Kellie said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2086511#Comment_2086511
You can’t really balance that.
I very much disagree. Perfection isn't required, but its defeatist that we never even try.
At the VERY least: bribe players with a post-match 25% BONUS BP multiplier for every SWF user.
This is one of those ideas that has literally no reasonable objections whatsoever.
The singular talking point against post-match BP bonuses ("but they'll know and remember swf players") is undercut by the tediousness of that, other means of telling early, ability to recognize them in games anyhow, unavoidable frequency of SWF, and most of all: net improvement, where the benefits overwhelmingly exceed whatever marginal impact might exist, if any. Why we don't have this at the very, very, very least then? Hell if I know.
Instead killers are simply expected to put up with over half of their games including anywhere from 50-100% of the other players exploiting 3rd party voice-coms. It's an indisputable steroids-level performance boost over how they'd play under the real game conditions, eliminating so much of the uncertainty and chaos that entails. Far worse than any imbalance though: it's how that extra edge, ability to gang-up, and atmosphere are so conducive of the bullying and toxicity that drives so many new/learning players away from playing killer... sometimes from the game entirely.
With even this marginal 50-100% BP compensation for the extra stress, players wouldn't be so prone to lobby dodging and avoiding times where SWF groups play the most. It'd likely somewhat reverse having to dip into the rank disparity for killer opponents when that greatly exacerbates all the issues. Right now the only reward for having to go up against players freely handed such a crazy advantage is that chance to MAYBE play some real Dead By Daylight matches... that game designed and balanced around isolated players deciding to work towards mutual interest in a weighing of self-preservation versus altruism. Yet you never know which games those will be, so you're liable to come out the gates swinging as hard as usually required & brutalize the team that could've put up a fun match instead. Hooray.
Anyhow... that's probably just the easiest, lowest effort, most unobjectionable solution around that would create any sort of impact--and for the tiny change, it'd be one massive impact too. It's the sort of change devs should be working on time-travel style right last second.
Truth is, there are any number of decent options to at least start bridging the SWF gap. I'll save myself from making this post ten times longer by leaving it at that and a self-reminder that it's not like anything will come from me outlining the sort of logical foundations for each option available here. The lack of solutions has never been the problem. It's a lack of motivation--effort too---but mostly the developers just don't really seem to care. They're perfectly content to perpetually heave buckets of water out of the rowboat instead of patching the leak.
Developers and many players alike seem to outright refuse even considering the smallest of QOL changes like a BP multiplier or mild gameplay considerations for the SWF issue when its so inarguably, well... an issue. There's this absolute conjecture just held as the word of God where ever simply allowing players any choice in the matter of who they go up again (even team-up with) instantly would destroy this game, turn lakes to fire, & rain ash from the skies. It's total BS in the first place, but hell--even if it things started heading that direction--it's easily reversed. Still such massive conjecture is grounds enough for most people as to why we can't even try anything at all. Personally, I'm pretty damn sure voice-coms is the most glaring issues in this whole game & resonate outward, cycling into new problems that heavily, heavily dampens the enjoyment of both killer and solo-survivor. But cest la vie.