El_Gingero
El_Gingero
About
- Username
- El_Gingero
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,600
- Last Active
Comments
-
@HypnoEmpire said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577589#Comment_2577589
That's crazy, I wonder how making 426 forum posts would affect the environment.
Want to talk about facts? You're just as hypocritical as you claim everyone else is. If you cared about the environment enough to criticize and personally insult people over it then you wouldn't own an electronic device capable of doing so in the first place. It's a contradiction that people like you completely fail to even recognize. Let's stop talking about other people; what have YOU done to help the environment? You seem to love talking about everyone else, but I don't see how what you're doing is much different. The only difference is that you're blaming the consumer while the consumers are blaming the company.
You know what's crazy about posting "facts" on the internet? You have to share a source if you want anyone to take you seriously. Continuing to push the "fact" that the merch store has a greater carbon footprint than NFTs while refusing to share any legitimate source is quite telling.
I hope you realize that people are upset about NFTs for many more reasons than simply their environmental impact. Even if the lies you regurgitated were true, that wouldn't dissuade anyone from hating BHVR for associating with NFTs. I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here.
I know what your real issue is; you're simply upset that people are talking about the NFT situation. It's obvious that you don't actually care about the environment seeing as you're still here, and if you were simply annoyed by the discussions then you wouldn't have started one yourself. I don't know what stakes you have in blockchains or Boss Protocol, but you definitely have stakes in something of the like if you're serious about your takes. If I'm wrong then your solution is simple; stop posting here. You're destroying the environment by simply looking at this. This is a good opportunity for you to practice what you preach.
I'm not a hypocrite at all. I'm happy to use electricity.
I don't believe I've personally insulted anyone and have had no reason to do so. In fact I've been on the receiving end of personal insults for simply stating a factual point (it bothers me not.)
My argument doesn't require any source for validation or accuracy, thus I’ve had no reason to provide one.
I've told no lies. Everything is factual.
The primary concern over this controversy is the environmental impact and to suggest otherwise is to clutch at straws.
I've no stakes in blockchain or anything related.
I don't need to practice what I preach. I'm comfortable with using electricity.
I’d usually respond with more words but it's late, I've got stuff to do, and you get the gist.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577677#Comment_2577677
Nah.
What happened was, you tried to make a point, but got overconfident and overplayed your hand. Then, when you encountered even the *slightest* bit of criticism, you choked. Now you're acting like the cat that got the cream, but the cat doesn't realize it's actually bull semen. And now all eyes are on you.
"I provided those numbers earlier. I could provide accurate numbers with sources to boot."
You want people to take your point seriously? Don't tell them the numbers you said were wrong.
You’re off with the faeries mate!
My point has been consistent the entire time and it has yet to be refuted.
Also I never said my numbers were wrong. What are ya chattin about.
-
@cannonballB said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577649#Comment_2577649
He is. I'm cutting right on that fine line of getting banned for his hilariousness too.
The funny thing is, if he sat back and thought about what he was saying, he COULD have a hugely important point. But he's so lost in his own ######### he can't see above it. Lol
I'm glad you're finding this entertaining.
However, perhaps you need to take a look at how you respond to diverse viewpoints and how you conduct yourself when disagreements arise.
Not lecturing or talking down to you, but you're in college and you've a potentially bright ahead of yourself, so try to seperate your mind from your emotions a little more.
Your emotions are clouding your judgement here. As a consequence you’ve misunderstood my argument on more than one occasion, and now you're apparently getting in trouble with the mods for how you're responding. That's no good.
My point though. I have thought about it, and it is solid. I wouldn't go so far as to say it's hugely important, but it's a good point nonetheless.
I think I’m one of the only people in this thread who isn't lost 😂
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577639#Comment_2577639
"I on the other hand don't need to cite any sources."
"you think I'm “running my mouth” for bringing the numbers to light."
How are you gonna give us "the numbers" if you don't have any sources?
I will give one thing to you, you're entertaining.
I provided those numbers earlier. I could provide accurate numbers with sources to boot, but it's uncecsary to support or validate my argument so I see no reason to do so.
If the reception weren't so hostile (not that I mind) perhaps I would humour the request, but alas 😁
-
@cannonballB said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577536#Comment_2577536
I mean you can stick your head in the sand, but my numbers up there are sourced and proven. You've yet to provide any sources and all of this is your own conjecture, not to mention that if the tshirts being made are made with carbon neutral companies you literally no longer have a point at all.
But you keep pretending you've done something here. We will continue to laugh at you.
Go ahead and cite your sources. Let's see what research you've done.
The numbers you posted are irrelevant, though I'll give you credit for at least posting them.
I on the other hand don't need to cite any sources. My argument is very straightforward. Demanding that someone “cites their sources” when their argument requires no such thing is a weak attempt to discredit them when you've no counterargument to offer.
I don't need to pretend anything. I made this post for a few reasons, but in part it was to expose hypocrisy and it has done that remarkably well.
You’re in college for Sustainability and Environmental Studies, yet you admit that you don't care about the environmental impact of BHVRs merc store, flippantly dismissing it, and that you think I'm “running my mouth” for bringing the numbers to light. I wonder how that attitude will serve you in your future endeavours.
Your anger is wasted and there's really not much else for us to say. All the best.
-
@cannonballB said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577413#Comment_2577413
Let me go ahead and pull some numbers, because why not.
Clothing in general provides roughly 10% of all carbon emissions a year. That's equal to about 1.2B tons of CO2 equivalent. (https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/fast-fashion-climate-change/)
BItcoin, on the other hand, has produced 36.95MEGATONS in the last year. (https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption)
Nope, you really don't have a point.
That doesn't refute my argument.
This NFT malarkey is hypocritical. When it comes down to it nobody actually cares enough to do anything other than add to the footprint with excessive forum posts.
Sure, let it be known how unhappy you are with BHVR. I've nothing against that, however at this stage it’s devolved into meaningless circle-jerking.
None of the people posting are going to give up any of their luxuries which harm the environment, so who are they to make demands?
There are far bigger fish to fry than NFTs. Just look at the gaming industry! Yet, we don't see all these gamers up in arms about that. How curious.
The merc store is responsible for a far greater carbon footprint than any of BHVRs involvement with NFTs.
That's just a fact.
When presented with this fact, nobody cares.
They continue to sit at their gaming PCs, connected to their broadband, posting on the forums of the video game they choose to play, fists shaking at their 4k monitors, horrified and appalled at BHVR, and NFTs.
We could get into blockchain as a whole, or the mobile phone industry, or the automobile industry, so on so forth, and it would simply highlight my point further.
-
@cannonballB said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577468#Comment_2577468
I've already proven you wrong. My job is done here.
You’ve done nothing of the sort, but we can leave it at that if you’d like. We’ll agree to disagree.
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577413#Comment_2577413
"It's an absolute, irrefutable fact that the sale of T Shirts on the merc store has had, does have, and will continue to have a considerably greater impact on the environment than anything BHVR is doing with NFTs."
The thing with facts that I think you're missing, is that they're true.
Are you trying to suggest that the sale of T Shirts on the merc store has had less of an environmental impact than BHVRs involvement with NFTs?
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577468#Comment_2577468
"Production and sale of T Shirts has substantially greater environmental impact."
Look out everyone, the impact of t Shirts is substantially greater now!
Yes! Substantially! Even using the (incorrect) numbers you suggested earlier, just 200 T Shirts would = 2,400 kWh!
The accurate numbers are even higher. Clearly we need to reevaluate our priorities.
-
@cannonballB said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577296#Comment_2577296
All I hear is "wanh Wanh people don't like NFTs. Wanh wanh I'm going to make this completely arbitrary, asinine argument that means nothing to anyone and doesn't even prove the point I'm trying to make because t-shirts have use, an NFT doesn't".
I'm doing my part buddy, I'm in college for Sustainability and Environmental Studies. My plan is to get a job helping cities, hopefully megacities become more sustainable. All you're doing is being pissy on the internet. Anyone who has half a brain sees right through your bullsheet.
You're right, I'm not too friendly to ignorant people. Especially when it comes to environmental causes, because most people are too ignorant to even know what they're talking about. Thanks for making my case for me.
Actually on second thought, I'm going to go through that little tirade of yours to further elucidate.
All I hear is "wanh Wanh people don't like NFTs. Wanh wanh I'm going to make this completely arbitrary, asinine argument that means nothing to anyone and doesn't even prove the point I'm trying to make because t-shirts have use, an NFT doesn't"
Eloquently written, I'm sure by a pleasant individual, however it's a fundamental misunderstand of my point. My argument is very straightforward and irrefutable. I will break it down:
BHVR: T Shirts = Luxury.
BHVR: NFT = Luxury.
1) Production and sale of T Shirts has substantially greater environmental impact.
2) T Shirt = easier solution.
3) Yet nobody cares about T Shirts.
4) Hypocrisy.
5) Fake activism.
All you're doing is being pissy on the internet.
Interesting. I'm in a perfectly good mood. I don't believe I've written anything remotely “pissy.”
You on the other hand...
Anyone who has half a brain sees right through your bullsheet.
My argument is not only simple, but strictly logical and irrefutable. Note how you've been unable to refute it, despite claiming that half a brain is all that's required. You do have half a brain at least? 😅
You're right, I'm not too friendly to ignorant people. Especially when it comes to environmental causes, because most people are too ignorant to even know what they're talking about. Thanks for making my case for me. Anyone who has half a brain sees right through your bullsheet.
I find it odd how you claim to be protective of the environment, yet you happily admit that you don't care about the environmental impact of the production and sale of T Shirts, A bit inconsistent!
If my argument is so easy to “see through,” why has nobody done that yet? I would be more than happy for you to provide me with a counterargument.
-
@cannonballB said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577296#Comment_2577296
All I hear is "wanh Wanh people don't like NFTs. Wanh wanh I'm going to make this completely arbitrary, asinine argument that means nothing to anyone and doesn't even prove the point I'm trying to make because t-shirts have use, an NFT doesn't".
I'm doing my part buddy, I'm in college for Sustainability and Environmental Studies. My plan is to get a job helping cities, hopefully megacities become more sustainable. All you're doing is being pissy on the internet. Anyone who has half a brain sees right through your bullsheet.
You're right, I'm not too friendly to ignorant people. Especially when it comes to environmental causes, because most people are too ignorant to even know what they're talking about. Thanks for making my case for me.
If that’s your takeaway then I don't hold out much hope for your success in college, or your future job prospects...or the environment for that matter, if you've anything to say about it 😂
Honestly though, why are you so angry? This has clearly pushed a few buttons.
I couldn't care less about NFTs. I'm simply calling out hypocrisy and fake activism with basic points. The responses I'm getting prove the points I've already made.
It's an absolute, irrefutable fact that the sale of T Shirts on the merc store has had, does have, and will continue to have a considerably greater impact on the environment than anything BHVR is doing with NFTs.
Its not even close! Yet nobody cares! Who could have seem that one coming, right?
You even admit yourself that you just don't care! Why could that be!?
You think you're doing your part and those thoughts could come with good intentions, but the reality is you're supporting and benefiting from a plethora of luxuries which harm the environment everyday, and going to college won't make a dent in your footprint.
You’re in no position to judge anyone.
-
@SlothGirly said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577178#Comment_2577178
that attitude of ignoring the problem on favour of calling people hypocrites is a huge issue in itself. At least people who complain about the issues at hand actually acknowledge them. And aren't ignorant because "they participate in society" you realise, consumers have no power in stopping global warming? we as consumers can do nothing to corporations. It's governments that need to pull their weight and do what people voted them in to do. And if they don't, vote them out and get in people with the will to pass bills that will aid in stopping global warming.
The thought that the consumer is to blame and they should feel bad because they buy products that are from a company contributing to global warming is asinine. Why should the consumer be to blame when it's the companies fault for not moving to a sustainable source of energy and production? consumers have no say in how a corporation runs their business, governments do.
In the case of BHVR and DBD, we as a community have the ability to stop BHVRs endorsement of NFTs, because they are objectively bad, your moral compass doesn't matter, NFTs are a problem because of their horrid energy consumption. and their use in illicit activities because of their decentralisation. In making BHVR stop their endorsement we can set an example for other gaming communities to hopefully take their stance if NFTs find their way to their community.
Where have I ignored the problem? I'm directly addressing it. I'm here bringing to light a larger threat hidden in plain sight. T Shirts.
Forget NFTs. We can come back to them later. What matters is the environment, right? The absolute fact of the matter, which nobody refute, is that BHVRs involvement in the sale of T Shirts has had a significantly larger footprint than any of their involvement with NFTs, and it will continue to do so.
So why does nobody seem to care? Very interesting indeed.
Sure, we can show our displeasure at BHVR for their involvement with NFTs. That's fine! There comes a point however where something needs to actually be done. At this stage we’re simply increasing the carbon footprint with all these posts.
These T Shirts are meaningless luxuries. Excess. With all these environmentally-minded individuals turning up to the forums, I see this as a fantastic opportunity to form a collective where we can actually make a genuine, impactful difference. That's what's important, right? The environment.
We need to stop fighting and come together to stop the sale of T Shirts on the merc store, immediately.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577151#Comment_2577151
Its because you know its much larger than one t-shirt, but you can't admit it because your entire point depends on that lie
https://64.media.tumblr.com/76703dd2c3e831b180eedf35563c804c/tumblr_ptz8mbM8av1x0uneyo5_400.gifv
Incorrect. Also we're talking about far more than one T Shirt.
This is a big deal, at least judging by the whole NFT malarkey. People should be outraged...but instead they’re fighting me! Fighting the solution! Its almost as if nobody truly cares anout the environment. Perplexing.
You should care about this... I'm helping you come to a real solution, as opposed to needlessly increasing the carbon footprint.
-
@cannonballB said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577258#Comment_2577258
Once again dude, no one gives 2 sheets what you think. You running your mouth means nothing to anyone, and you're only making yourself look like a moron.
Please, continue your little diatribe, while the rest of us laugh at you.
See. You don't care.
On DBDs merc store, just the T Shirts alone blow all of BHVRs involvement with NFTs out of the water! It doesn’t even come close. This is huge.
Yet...me bringing this important fact to light is me, in your opinion, “running my mouth.”
You even go so far as to suggest that it's moronic! That doesn't sound too friendly!
The T Shirt issue is the bigger fish to fry, and it’s far easier to fix. If you ever decide to become environmentally conscious, can I count on you to add your name to the list?
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577146#Comment_2577146
Did you know that the energy required to produce just one cotton T Shirt is about 494 kWh!
That's notably more than the average NFT transaction.
Q: how much is the average NFT transaction?
This guy 🤣
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577136#Comment_2577136
"You can't just look at the energy consumption of one element, then take that one element and disregard everything else."
60 minutes earlier: "Did you know that the energy required to produce just one cotton T Shirt is about 494 kWh!
That's notably more than the average NFT transaction. "
At least try to be consistent in your bull #########
You really do miss the point a whole lot.
Context my friend.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577070#Comment_2577070
where do you draw the line on items that are produced at the cost of the environment?
When the energy requirement for one thing uses as much electricity as a refrigerator running for 31 days, I draw the line, and I think any reasonable person would too.
That's a simplistic view which doesn't hold up to reality.
You can't just look at the energy consumption of one element, then take that one element and disregard everything else.
How many NFTs are BHVR involved with?
How many T Shirts have they sold?
Why have the forums not been in flames with posts about the T Shirt controversy?
-
@TruEternity said:
I think the point being made is going over peoples heads. NFT's are currently pointless, and merely to brag you have an excess of money. Here's the question though, where do you draw the line on items that are produced at the cost of the environment? Useless NFT's? Fancy T-shirts? Poor fuel economy SUV's?
The point is all these sudden eco warriors are posting on a forum, for a game that is a massive luxury, essentially wasting energy. Does it pale in energy consumption to NFT's, yes, but if you are truly that much an eco warrior why are you using energy to complain about using energy? People getting upset in this thread missed the point.
Pretty much! 🍻
-
@AnObserver said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577032#Comment_2577032
At the very least a T-shirt has functional use.
Your Uncle's dic-pick scooped up by an NFT bot does not.
So you admit that you don't care so long as the thing creating the footprint has some kind of a functional use, no matter how small. Correct or?
Well, as established these T Shirts are luxuries, not necessities. Nobody is buying a DBD T Shirt from the official merc store so they may be warm whilst they sleep rough on the streets.
An NFT transaction is also a luxury.
Who are you to decide which luxuries matter and which don't?
The reality is that the consistent sale of these T Shirts requires tremendous energy, orders of magnitude higher than for example, an NFT transaction. No matter how many NFTs BHVR are involved with, the energy consumption won't even come close.
So I really do think we should be focusing on the T Shirts.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2577027#Comment_2577027
It's funny, you mention t-shirts use more kwh to produce than an nft transaction, yet don't list how much energy an nft transaction needs.
You know, the same question you were avoiding yesterday
I didn't avoid the question as you're well aware. I already know the answer. Anyone can google it. The question was simply the wrong question and was irrelevant to the discussion.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
Are you forgetting that NFT's serve absolutely no purpose other than to show off how rich you are, or to launder money? Or are we just going to act like things like T shirts have no use at all.
You can't compare things like NFT's to things that actually serve a purpose worthy enough of spending energy.
So your principles stop at T Shirts with fancy graphics or.
These T Shirts are not necessities, they are luxuries.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
An average conventional cotton t-shirt requires about 12 kWh of energy to produce,
By current estimations, a single Ethereum transaction consumes 48.14 kWh.
You can't even troll right
12 kWh is way off.
But even using your incorrect number, that's 12 x 32 = 384 kWh! By your own admission 335.86 kWh more than the average NFT transaction.
A mere 200 T Shirts? 2,400 kWh!
We need to focus our efforts on the T Shirts.
Do you add your name to the list?
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2573401#Comment_2573401
You seriously didn't follow up on my first question, did you?
You mean the asinine question that was irrelevant to the discussion?
Honestly you're not arguing on good faith here and it's getting a bit tedious repeating myself so I'm going to bow out. Feel free to bring me back in if you've anything new to add.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2573376#Comment_2573376
Oh, the collective, huh. Then tell us what the Collective impact of many NTFs is then? (Hint: just the energy use alone of 1 NFT transaction blows your cellphone argument out of the water)
You're honestly trying to suggest that the energy consumption of 1 NFT transaction is greater than the total energy consumption of the entire mobile phone industry?
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2573359#Comment_2573359
On the subject of environment
Comparing NFT to a single car=false equivalence
Comparing NFT to a user's phone= totally acceptable
Huh?
I never compared NFT to an individual using a phone. I compared NFT to the entire mobile phone industry.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2573364#Comment_2573364
"That's a gross oversimplification which tells us nothing of value."
"You're either using a phone or a computer and you're using some kind of internet connection. You're actively harming and supporting harm on the environment as you post in a thread about harming the environment."
Physician, heal thyself
You seem to be confused. I'm specifically talking about the collective of individuals. There's no such thing as one random person using one random phone. There are billions of people using billions of phones.
My argument has been consistent the entire time.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2573290#Comment_2573290
The fact that you don't know the energy requirement for an NFT transaction and continuing to paper over it is very telling. You're being willfully misleading.
You claim I'm the one asking the asinine question of an individuals energy consumption of 1 nft vs 1 automobile. Hardly out of line, considering you also throw whataboutisms like factories, warehouses, etc.
Youre simultaneously trying to say that NFTs aren't a problem compared with decades of automobile use, yet think it's perfectly okay to handwave criticism of nfts massive energy requirement with "but you use a phone too."
The question you asked was essentially irrelevant.
Its not as simple as “the consumption of 1 NFT vs 1 automobile.” That's a gross oversimplification which tells us nothing of value.
Factories, warehouses etc, are not “whataboutisms” but more so fundamental components and to suggest otherwise is frankly naive.
Do you think vehicles just pop out of the sky? It's an industry. The vehicle isn’t the only thing affecting the environment.
The only one “handwaving” here is you. You “handwave” the actual realities of how industries operate as “whataboutisms” simply because it doesn't suit your argument.
I on the other hand am simply calling out people’s hypocrisy.
Those people using phones are the sole reason for the existence of the phone industry. The entire phone industry, the workers, their vehicles and fuel, their offices, factories, warehouses, construction, maintenance, manufacturing, all the energy consumption and environmental impact, all because people want to buy and use phones.
That's not a small thing for you to “handwave.” You’re directly responsible. But you don't care because you like your phone. So why are you taking issue with NFTs?
-
@Majin151 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2573223#Comment_2573223
Automobiles are a physical thing and are necessary for transportation for some
Nfts are purely digital and are a blatant ponzi scheme
That doesn't refute any of my points though. Different people have different values and they put value in things differently.
Automobiles are indeed necessary as transportation for many people, however they aren't exclusive to these people and the industry has still caused tremendous harm to the environment.
Everyone who cares about the environment and who doesn’t absolutely need a vehicle for travel that can't be worked around some other way, should get rid of their vehicle and stop paying for fuel.
They won't though because it's inconvenient and their convenience is more important.
You're posting in this thread. You're either using a phone or a computer and you're using some kind of internet connection. You're actively harming and supporting harm on the environment as you post in a thread about harming the environment.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2573161#Comment_2573161
How much energy does a single nft transaction require.
How much emissions does a single automobile create in a year.
This is the second time I've asked you to answer that question.
Firstly you're asking the wrong question.
The correct question is “what impact has the automobile industry had on the environment vs. NFTs and where do the projections lead us.”
This can be worded in several ways giving emphasis on emissions etc, but the principle is the overall impact of the entire industry.
You're just asking to compare one transaction to the emissions of one random vehicle over the course of a year. That's an asinine question and the answer would be mostly irrelevant. It doesn't for example take into account the environmental impact of factories, warehouses, construction, equipment, maintenance, offices, personnel, importation and exportation, the list goes on for quite a while.
-
@SlothGirly said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2573145#Comment_2573145
no, you've completely misread what I said. I stated that we as individual consumers have an insignificant effect, and we need to hold the companies we consume from accountable. If companies were to beginning making a shift to green energy, there wouldn't be this problem. And in fact, it isn't an issue in the automobile industry as a majority of those companies are making the shift to sustainable and green energy. however people continue to believe they are the issue behind global warming, because that's what corporations want you to believe. You are one of the people who seem to believe that those who participate in a lifestyle they have no control over are at fault. Which is exactly the reason why we're so ######### as a species right now. You need to start realising we aren't the issue for partaking in the activities. But rather those giving the activities to us are the issue.
I read what you wrote, you're just misunderstanding what I'm saying.
The individuals are the “problem.”
The corporations are there because the individuals are there.
The individuals are the ones buying the goods/services from the corporations.
They are the ones enabling and supporting, directly.
Thus, you can't say the individual is “insignificant” or not to blame, because it's this collective of individuals that are creating the entire “problem” in the first place.
We can talk about green energy until the cows come home but the fact of the matter is that everyone’s being hypocritical. Most people won't stand by your principles when it affects their lifestyle negatively.
You want to play on video games, post to twitter and Facebook with your fancy phone, grab a takeaway and watch Netflix, etc etc etc, regardless of whether or not it impacts the environment.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2573097#Comment_2573097
You should really look into the energy consumption of those things you listed versus an NFT transaction. It's like the equivalent of downplaying the damage of a forest fire, because campfires also exist.
Are you honestly trying to suggest that NFTs are more harmful to the environment than the automobile industry? Which is only one of the things I listed.
-
@SlothGirly said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2573097#Comment_2573097
and it has such an insignificant effect. What people should do, and what I do, is use your damned right to vote. vote out the people who enable big corporations to burn so much fossil fuel. Or help invest in new green technologies. This "oh well you do X, X and X" is so impossibly ignorant to the bigger issues. If the leading contributors to global warming didn't produce as much as they do, we wouldn't be in our predicament. The consumers aren't to blame, it's governing bodies and corporations.
You’re saying that the gaming industry, the automobile industry, the food industry, to give just three examples, have an insignificant effect on the environment? If that’s the case, what have you against NFTs?
Those industries don’t exist just for the sake of it, they provide goods/services to the consumer for a profit. You. Your neighbour. Your friend from work, all part of the collective supporting and being provided for by the very corporations and industries you profess to oppose.
That’s why this NFT controversy is being labelled as “woke.” The people creating the controversy don’t stand by their principles. They happily indulge in a plethora of activities and services that, in their own view, harm the environment every day.
-
@SlothGirly said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2573080#Comment_2573080
yes, but the amount a single person contributes to global warming is inconsequential to that of big corporations. Your entire lifes contribution to global warming is equal to a single second of contribution from the worlds industry. Stop trying to blame individuals, and instead realise we aren't the issue. It's the companies we enable that are.
Those individuals are part of a collective. That’s the point isn’t it? You’re supporting and utilising the things that in your view, have a negative impact on the environment. Every game you buy a game, every time you check your Twitter, or pay your electricity bill, drive your car, get on a bus or on a plane, etc.
-
There’s much hypocrisy. All the people talking about global warming own computers, play on video games, have phones, internet, 5g, cars, use public transport, so on so forth.
-
@danielmaster87 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2568457#Comment_2568457
Killers should not be able to mori using an add-on. That's overpowered.
You’re saying Myers with that add-on is as strong as or stronger than Nurse?
-
@SleepyWillo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2566446#Comment_2566446
But CoH was also nerfed considerably before it goes live. Pre-nerf it was extremely strong.
Petty wording aside, they’re two entirely different abilities that were changed in entirely different ways. As I said, time will tell.
-
People keep going on about Circle of Healing which will be strong for sure, and likely too strong for SWF, however barely anyone talks about Shadow Step, arguably the stronger perk overall, countering the majority of killer info perks.
At the end of the day we’ll have to see how it plays out, but killers already have to manage 4 survivors equipped with DH, Unbreakable, DS, BT, whilst defending 7 generators which can pop in a comically short period of time regardless of killer pressure. It’s perfectly understandable that many killers are concerned.
-
@BlueMeansDeep said:
Where there’s this massive concern about it being the most OP perk in the game, but after a few weeks, almost nobody uses it? Especially outside of players using the new survivor.
Boon totems aside, I keep seeing people reference Lucky Break in this way, yet what they all fail to take into account is that Lucky Break was nerfed considerably before it went live. Pre-nerf it was extremely strong.
-
I don’t see anything unfair about the situation. Hatch is already an automatic second chance and the killer beat you to it. Then the gates were powered but the killer got to you. Sounds fair enough to me. Bare in mind they gave up a perk slot for NOED and it did exactly what it was supposed to. Honestly if the killer had 4 perks throughout the match you may not have made it as far as you did.
Also bones aren’t that hard to do between 4 survivors especially with totem tracking perks/map. Plus you have DH equipped which is a far more potent second chance perk. You even stated that if you knew about NOED you’d have stayed injured and used DH to get away if need be. Why is that fair but NOED finally doing one thing the entire match unfair? Especially when hatch was there for you with no perk slots required and then the exit gates were powered.
-
Of course.
-
They will probably change his useless add-ons into different useless add-ons.
-
Yeah I’ve been noticing some weirdness on Xbox X. Scratch marks with big gaps in between even though the survivor is running the whole time.
-
Billy can’t even curve on most tiles if the survivor has optimal movement and his power is useless for mobility on a number of maps. He’s great at killing people in dead zones and he can get around open maps quickly that’s not good enough for top 5 imho. Bubba is much stronger.
-
His power is still going to be weak with too much counter play however I'll definitely be playing him as I find him rewarding and I've quite a few Halloween cakes to go through.
-
Overall the patch is a mixed bag for killers.
Trapper had a small QoL buff that had been needed for years, with some add-on reworks to boot. I’m happy he finally gets an extra trap to carry around and it's a good start but let's be honest, he still needs adjustments.
Pig I can't comment on as I don't play her but it looks like she was nerfed in some areas and buffed in others.
Deathslinger’s nerf makes me question the dev’s understanding of their own game. Not only did they make him feel clunky to play as they did with Twins, but they nerfed his terror radius to “bring it in line with other ranged killers,” ignoring the fact that he had a smaller terror radius for a reason, being his fundamental design.
Huntress for example has a lullaby because she can hit you from across the map, down you very quickly, and down 2 survivors + injure a third before having to reload. That’s insane pressure and lethality. A lullaby makes perfect sense.
Deathslinger has a relatively short range, has to shoot you, reel you in and hit you, and that's if there’re no obstacles to break the chain. If the chain is broken he is stunned. Then he has to reload either way. That’s one damage state, taking notably longer to pull off, with a forced delay immediately thereafter.
Short range, much slower TTK, much less pressure, much less lethality. That’s why he had a shorter terror radius and it's pretty weird for the devs to disregard his fundamental dedign in favour some kind of “blanket balancing.”
Now vs. Deathslinger, a good survivor will just run to a safe spot as they hear his terror radius increasing. A killer relying on a strong 1vs1 to compensate for his terrible map pressure, having his 1vs1 and map pressure nerfed in one sweep. He can run tinkerer but that only works when it procs and briefly at that, and Deathslinger gets around the map very slowly.
Plague buffs seem really good and I'm looking forward to playing her.
Ghost face was nerfed and buffed depending in what add-ons you use.
Boons look like they’re going to be annoying/tedius to deal with but I look forward to trying them out on survivor.
-
No different than survivors using DS, DH, Unbreakable, comms, etc.
-
@Johnny_XMan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2558597#Comment_2558597
I wouldn't compare comms to a player being able to fly around the map by hacking. In fact, yes there is a higher chance a player flying around the map would win the game than a person on comms.
As I've already said, I understand there is a slight advantage, but it's not enough for me to accept it as "cheating". As cheating constitutes as something that is A) Against the rules B) Altering the game files in order to receive an advantage. Both of which the developers have already confirmed do not apply to SWF on comms.
I can get behind the idea that perhaps they could buff certain things like totem spawn locations, Terror Radius mechanics adjustments (which they have already done via creating perks that give the oblivious status and things like that)...
The reason I point out that my friends and I would do good even without comms, isn't to say if we can then so can you. It is to point out that the game isn't busted with comms. Which is what a lot of complaints are making it out to be. Comms isn't not some "magical" elixir that gives people the ability to stomp killers.
So when people talk about SWF communication advantage vs Outright hacking/cheating, I consider those two VERY different things.
I wasn’t directly comparing SWF to using “hacks” but more so giving an example: just because comms don’t outright win you games, it doesn’t mean they’re not an unfair advantage in the right hands and with the appropriate intentions, just as “hacks” don’t necessarily win you games either.
When I say cheating I just mean using something the game wasn’t designed around for an advantage that overrides certain mechanics.
Comms certainly aren’t a “magical elixir” that give people the ability to stomp killers and that’s not what I’m saying but I do think they provide an unfair and unintended advantage and I do think it breaks the balance of the game on a fundamental level, but we’ll just have to agree to disagree.
-
Yes.
-
Looks vastly superior imho. DBD is a relatively ugly looking game.
-
@Johnny_XMan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2557991#Comment_2557991
But you do understand that having information alone doesn’t win you the game right?
Also, I am not going to agree that the game was designed with solos in mind, because I’ve never read anywhere that this is the case. From a developer’s perspective that is.
My thought has always been that they created those perks for solo players, because imagine if it had been the opposite and the ‘survive with friend’ was the first option in the beginning… leaving those with no friends to play without perk options. It’s also kind of stupid to think that a game company never expected anyone to play with a friend. This game wasn’t made in the 90s where telecommunication applications were not a thing.
Also, I want to reiterate. Saying “Killer is on me at shack” is not the same as being able to see the killer’s aura as they appear in the match, as an example. In high ranks this information while it might be valuable to a new person isn’t as much to someone who is much more experienced. I can tell you my friends and I could turn off comms and still do just as good if not better because many times we aren’t talking about the match… meaning we are not 100% focused.
This is why calling it “cheating” is a bit of an overstatement for me. Because there is a gray area where as a competent solo survivor you can still coordinate and win, and as an experienced survivor you can still find the hex in a specific place once you have gathered enough map knowledge.
Well of course having info doesn’t outright win you the game but that’s besides the point. A player using “hacks” to fly around the map doesn’t automatically win the game either.
When you play DBD, by default you’re working with limited information based almost entirely around game sense. Voice comms aren’t even a feature of the game and if you want to use them you have to do so via a third party.
Survivors have four perk slots. Some perks provide intentionally limited information at the expense of a slot. You have to make a choice between information or a second chance / utility perk, thus information is seen as a gameplay-specific enhancement within the confines of the customisation system, just as an exhaustion perk is.
Being on comms circumvents this and provides each member of your group with the bulk of these info perks for free, no slots required, allowing each member to use second chance and utility perks they otherwise wouldn’t be able to equip.
To me it’s clear that DBD wasn’t designed with comms as the primary intention, and that it wasn’t designed with the implications of comms in mind.
(Note I’m not saying the developers never expected anyone to use comms.)
If it was designed around comms it’d have them built-in and information perks wouldn’t be gameplay-specific customisation options at the expense of other gameplay-specific customisation options. They’d instead be built into the survivor’s toolkit, no slots required, and they’d provide a level of information that rivals comms instead of being intentionally limited. The game doesn’t even have a ping system.
The example of informing your team that “the killer is on you at shack” provides them with valuable information that could easily change the tide of the match in various scenarios and can’t be matched by information perks.
You can say you do just as well without comms but frankly those are just words with no substance, no offence intended. Perhaps you do, but this is again besides the point.
Now, as I said before I’ve no issue with people wanting to play with their friends. Sure, it’s not a fun handicap to come up against and it does hurt the balance of the game notably, but it’s just a game after all and people play games with their friends. It’s still technically cheating though because of the how the game is designed, regardless of whether or not the developers envisioned people using comms with their friends.
-
Half the time they actually lose you distance. They’re really good in some situations, but incredibly inconsistent with a huge risk and little reward.
-
@Johnny_XMan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2556886#Comment_2556886
Which mechanics are being overridden? lol
The minimal advantage they get alone, isn't enough to sustain pressure if the killer is good, let alone call it 'cheating'. Dare I say you can have a better coordinated SOLO team than a team who is purely relying on information, because that at their core they understand the concept of Looping, Timing, and Taking Aggro.
The problem is that this community has become so set on thinking that Solo Queue sucks because of the information they "lack". Which isn't the case in many matches. More than 95% of my own matches consist of people who cannot loop a killer more than 5 seconds (meaning that even if I am being efficient I cannot stay on a gen to save my life), somehow act like touching a gen means committing a crime, aren't willing to trade one hook or take a hit when it matters, the list goes on. These are traits of bad teammates, NONE of which have anything to do with communication.
Maybe when there weren't as many perks and nerfs I would have said communication mattered, but now I don't believe it matters to that extent anymore.
The game is designed around working with limited information. That’s why there are perks to alleviate aspects of this to a limited degree, which take up valuable perk slots. SWF get most of these information perks for free and usually in a more powerful form, freeing up their collective slots for much stronger second chance perks in addition. It’s a huge advantage that breaks the game.
I get that people want to play with their friends and that’s fine, but it’s still technically cheating no matter how you try to slice it.