KateMain86
KateMain86
About
- Username
- KateMain86
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2954849#Comment_2954849
You were the one saying twice that we should stop but you still respond even though I don’t even ask you direct questions.
maybe the creators of the videogame get to decide what they want to represent? I just told you that they have stated in the past they don’t want to include real-life religions and that LGBTQ+ inclusion doesn’t mean they have to include anything and everything else (which is not in anyway related to your opinion - one thing doesn’t have anything to do with the other and that’s a fact. You can see in differently but then your view in this case is wrong).
i never said you shouldn’t ask for inclusion of your (or any others) faith. And the devs may very well change their stance on this, it’s their decision after all as was LGBTQ+ inclusion.
You replied in a way where I felt I needed to respond to what you said to me. I only said I didn't want to so as to not get the thread locked for going off subject. You said some things I wanted to speak my mind about and so I replied. We can/could've continued it somewhere else, like on my profile or something.
And in all fairness, you didn't have to reply to my first reply at all. That was just me responding to the subject of the OP. You chose to chime in and give your opinion to what I said which led to the thread being derailed.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2954822#Comment_2954822
It doesn’t matter if you disagree. This is not about your opinion at all. And if there was relation there than it was also there before any LGBTQ+ inclusion as they have included different kind of topics before (like different ethnicities/nationalities that are usually not represented/under-represented in video games).
you were the one tying this to LGBTQ+ inclusion without it having a real connection to your request of belief being represented.
also you can always stop responding. I don’t force you to.
You can too. And it does matter if I disagree. Not everyone sees this the same way.
I merely brought up the idea of representing diverse faiths. If me mentioning lgbt representation in the context of simply being open to the idea of it bothers you then I'm sorry you feel that way. What should and shouldn't be represented? Who gets to decide and will that decision resonate well with the community? All important questions in my opinion.
-
@Kaitsja said:
We're going into the sixth anniversary and they still haven't done all the stuff they said they were going to do from the fifth anniversary.
Remember how Mori's were meant to become part of the base game experience that you had to earn instead of it being an offering and just tunneling for the mori?
That was that long ago? I had completely forgotten about all that but now that you mentioned it its coming back to memory. I didn't realize it had been that long since they talked about that. This past year went by fast it seems.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2954797#Comment_2954797
Just leave LGBTQ+ inclusion out if you are talking about religion/belief inclusion. Those have nothing to do with eachother and just because LGBTQ+ topics aren’t explicitly excluded over heterosexual topics doesn’t mean anything (neither positive nor negative) related to real-life religions or even politics.
this has nothing to do with differing opinions.
I disagree. I think if people identify themselves with their faith, which many do, then there can be relation there. Anyway, I'm pretty sure this thread will get locked if we continue talking about this here.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2954775#Comment_2954775
well. They do care obviously but I thought you were talking about representation through (playable) in-game characters… because that’s what representation usually means in the video game context.
i do understand that faith, belief etc is something people define themselves with and is something important for them as their individual person. But it’s not like some religions are included while others are explicitly excluded. There is nothing excluded because the devs disagree with it at all and accusing them of this seems pretty derogatory for me..
Well I see this very differently than you do. I think if video games become a setting in which real life social things are represented then it opens the door for other things as well. Its only a matter of time before people look at this and desire or even simply think that other aspects of humanity and reality should be represented as well. Inclusivity needs to be defined but its one of those words I think that is defined differently based on the individual. What all is on the table and what isn't and for the things that aren't would it ever be possible that they are one day? This is all just my opinion and view on it. Its not what this thread is about so I don't want to turn this into a conversation about something off topic. If a thread about this comes up we can talk about it more there.
-
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2954706#Comment_2954706
Yes, that's the math I just did. 1 Survivor on the ground, 1 picking up and 2 on Generators.
No Perk should prevent tunneling, you shouldn't be able to 1v1 the Killer
Its still situational and circumstantial. That view is based on the assumption 1 is picking up and 2 are on generators. You also have to factor in daily rituals, rift challenges and pretty much every other reason the other survivors are there for. Its why there will probably never be a widely accepted balance in this game by the community.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2954401#Comment_2954401
They already stated they will not add actual religion for their characters into the game as this would definitely be offensive to many religious people for various reasons.
Plague being a priestess is included and since it’s a made up and ancient religion it’s accepted.
this is not comparable to the lgbt representation (which you haven’t seen plenty of, just David being revealed as gay but there will be more in the future). Their original stand was to also let any kind of sexuality/sexual identity/orientation left open but they have still added multiple explicit heterosexual relationships and thus they were (unintentionally) excluding anything LGBTQ+ mentions which is just unequal treatment.
Yea I wasn't referring to just David. If you don't think they've represented the lgbt community well in recent time I suggest opening your eyes a bit. Its kind of hard for anyone who has been following DBD's social media, live streams and simply playing the game to not realize they care about and represent the lgbt community well.
Its pretty disheartening to know that is their current stance on religious representation in the game. Faith to me and I assume many others in this world is more than just a belief in something. It is our identity. My faith is who I am. I think it would be cool to see that represented in some way in DBD one day. My idea of inclusion is probably very different from theirs and others in the community. Inclusion to me is including that which you disagree with too. It certainly is an interesting subject. However I do think if a company is going to actively take a stance on representation, they should consider that faith is something that billions of people see a large part of their life in, and for perhaps even many is their identity.
-
@Aztreonam78 said:
I did gens, I had chases, I had a normal game, now I opened Exit Gate or somebody else opened them so i can escape and nothing stopping me.
And i decide to throw myself at the killer (want more chases) or Iplay a martyr and save team mate from a hook, immediately dying after. I lose mmr even though I clearly could escape.
Is this considered an exploit of the system?
If you only knew how many people meme their brains out in this game. I think you're good. I would honestly be surprised if not escaping when you easily could have would be considered exploiting.
-
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2954697#Comment_2954697
72 seconds are 144 seconds worth of Generator time, if the Survivor team is efficient, so it's a huge time loss for the Killer
No I mean if a survivor gets tunneled (and downed within a few seconds of getting unhooked) the killer can just leave them on the ground and pressure the other survivors while they wait out DS. Its all situational. My point is neither perk is really super effective at preventing tunneling.
-
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2954668#Comment_2954668
That's almost a Generator's worth of time the Killer wastes waiting for 2 Perks, that the Survivor may or may not have. That's a win in my book
Well for DS if a survivor got tunneled and is on the ground that is 1 less survivor working on a gen. Waiting out BT is just a few short seconds.
-
@MikaelaWantsYourBoon said:
Nah, killers are tunnelling from start to today. It was always strong strategy, so nothing changed. But survivors have BT & DS, so you can punish killers if they do that.
*Waits out BT*
*Waits out DS*
I'm sorry how again can we punish killers that tunnel? Oh you mean the few that forget these perks exists. I've seen way more killers wait out those 2 perks than get punished by them. Once your mmr or whatever they use now puts you into a higher skill bracket those perks are essentially worthless in my opinion.
-
A higher blood point cap and new items in the blood web would be a nice announcement. Perhaps an item trade in feature too where all those unwanted offerings can be traded for other items.
-
I'm hoping to see more diversity of representation and inclusion since they seem very interested in this. I've seen a lot of it for the lgbt community. It would be nice to have something to represent players of diverse faiths in DBD's diverse community. I think having something for everyone eventually would be nice.
-
@Cleverotter said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2952765#Comment_2952765
Yes but also no other perk injures you at the start of the match
Oh I wouldn't mind still being injured. The killer wouldn't need to see it with the perk on. Maybe that can be something else the perk could do in that it makes you not appear injured on the icon even though you are.
-
Temple of Purgation... is there a map offering for that one? Asking for a friend.
-
@Laluzi said:
Hook saturation is fairly high. You generally won't notice the effects of petrified oak unless you play an indoor map (least noticeable on the Game, most noticeable on Midwich or RPD), where suddenly the distance between those hooks is filled with walls and other obstacles that make pathing much tighter and easier to disrupt. The algorithm that judges hook distance vertically is notoriously bad, too - you can end up with a big patch of first floor that's hookless because there's one or two hooks on the floor above it.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2952719#Comment_2952719
That would be too powerful. Something like Tenacity/Power Struggle/Flip Flop/Unbreakable sits in a sweet spot where it can be extremely powerful and thrives on teamwork, but the killer has options to counter it once they know it's in play. If a teammate is running around with Breakout, they can be baited and downed or chased off. Pallets will eventually be exhausted. But for the likes of Boil Over - true self wiggle off builds can't be reliable because there really isn't anything the killer can do other than slug you to death.
Too powerful... in a coordinated SWF thats actually coordinating plays like this. You'll rarely if ever see it happen in solo que.
-
The only thing I would change about this perk is to hide the broken status effect from the killer so they don't know you have it. That would add some value to it.
-
@KerJuice said:
Keep in mind that perks like Boil Over, Flip Flop, & Breakout exists. Then you have multiple survivors possibly dying in the same area (causing hooks to get destroyed). Those are most likely taken into consideration on the maps where there are so many hooks within close proximity. If too many survivors die in the same area, the last survivor or last two could abuse running over to where the destroyed hooks (from Sacrafices) are, get downed there, then wiggle off. Rinse and repeat as desired. That’s not ideal for the killer.
You’re right where there are maps with poor hook placement (the game bottom floor), so this game does not have consistency across the board. I think those maps are just simply overlooked.
As for the hook offerings, I don’t know if the killer’s value is multiplied in distance by 4 or more, but for survivors, their’s stack so one person using a hook offering will have very little affect. That offering may make the difference between someone getting 99% wiggle then hooked, or wiggle off- but that’s such a low probability (probably the same as Kobying off a hook without any luck offerings).
I've been running flip flop, boil over, unbreakable and no mither for awhile. Trust me when I say it hardly makes much of a difference in most situations. If someone takes a hit and has break out then you have a better chance but its rare. The hook offerings are pointless in my opinion. I have never noticed any difference using them. Even when I see multiple putrid oaks played it all looks the same. At this point I just have to hope the killer leaves me on the ground long enough to get enough flip flop progress to have a chance or even get to use no mither.
-
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2952293#Comment_2952293
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2952298#Comment_2952298
You're not supposed to wiggle off on your own, or even in a 2man.
The amount of time wiggling off wastes is so huge, that you should at least require 3 Survivors to do so
I know. It would be nice though with an entire loadout revolved around wiggling off the killer to actually do that at least a couple times every few games without having to find precise spots on the map and still hope that there isn't a hook close enough to give you a chance to wiggle off.
-
Funny you should mention this OP, I actually mentioned this in the feedback forum a few days ago. Glad to see I'm not the only person who thinks this. Yea I think on some maps the hooks spawn way too close. Even using boil over to obscure the hook vision doesn't seem to help very much.
-
Thats not ships thats slugs. :P
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951456#Comment_2951456
I am talking about Bubbas skin underneath the Claudette mask. It was darker for Claudette’s cosmetic compared to his other cosmetics, thus making it unintentionally Black Face.
as to why you don’t notice it: are you a person of color and was this always apparent for your opponents? If not then of course you won’t notice it often. We are talking about streamers that had to endure this in their streams.
Now that I did not know happened. I understand now why you called it unintentionally black face. I was just confused there so thank you for clarifying that for me.
-
I dare not do the math on how many blood points you spent to do this. True dedication indeed.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951553#Comment_2951553
…
careful, you are almost showing your true colors.
Well I'm glad I can always count on you to help me from crossing that fine line of bigotry.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951504#Comment_2951504
I am like 99.9 % sure Smuk very much knows flower isn’t a sexuality or part of the LGBTQ+ community and they intentionally put random words there which really doesn’t help making any point other than being disrespectful.
I've seen people identify as many different things before. If someone ever did identify as a flower, where would they belong?
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951517#Comment_2951517
Mooks we both know best friend KateMain86 won't listen to what I say lmao
I listen, but I also disagree with just about everything you say here. But hey we can always agree to disagree when we can't agree on anything. :)
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951504#Comment_2951504
"an attempt to distort the definition"
It literally is the definition.
After looking up the definition of "bad faith" this sounds like an opinion to me.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951496#Comment_2951496
sorry but when someone is making an obvious bigoted comment like that I can assume bigotry behind it. If they actually didn’t mean it that way and just weren’t able to articulate themselves better because of language barrier then fair enough - they are free to state so and apologize.
this was more than unnecessary. GoodBoyKaru has told you how it was lacking basic respect in a very clear and objective way.
But you see it wasn't on obvious bigoted comment. That is your opinion and view on it. I understand that some people are more sensitive about things that are said like this than others but to assume someone said something bigoted because they didn't "use the right words" when making a point is, in my opinion, not fair. Yes you can assume it was because you have your views and opinions. I try to give people the benefit of the doubt unless they've made a clear stance on something.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951480#Comment_2951480
Oh come on, it is crossing a line to talk about the LGBTQ+ Community like that and if it really wasn’t intentional to be in bad faith by Smuk then they can very much say so and apologize for it.
I will agree it was unnecessary but I also think its a little too far to assume it was bad faith. Something being unnecessary doesn't mean it has any bigotry behind it. They made their point and we can agree or disagree with it and move on.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951479#Comment_2951479
Indeed; perhaps Smuk may speak for themselves rather than Forums user KateMain86 deciding on their intent for them and talking down to an LGBT+ person (Forums user Marigoria) on a remark which, in the given context, appears to be derogatory and is one made which does not respect the personal autonomy, basic rights, or dignity of LGBT+ people. I'm so glad we agree that random people completely unrelated to the conversation deciding on intent isn't the greatest- maybe next time you'll stay silent, just like you should do on topics with which you don't care, like DBD's lore.
Smuk did speak for themselves in the first reply they made. I don't think they need to clarify anything. It wasn't a bad faith take, but I supposed you'll take that as just an opinion anyway. Obviously what they said offended you enough to establish your own intent behind their statement, but that doesn't make it anything more than their opinion.
Also I did clarify my stance on the lore before: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933017/#Comment_2933017
Sure I'm not super into it but it is interesting to learn more about the characters I play the most. I think the game should have more content in it that is lore related. In any given match, the lore has nothing to do with what is going on which is a simple repair generators and open a door.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951457#Comment_2951457
They could have easily made the point without making up those words. That was completely unnecessary.
Unnecessary? Yea. But to accuse someone of bad faith because you don't like the way they stated their opinion and view on this is also unnecessary.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951470#Comment_2951470
"BAD FAITH: A “Bad Faith” discussion is one in which one or both of the parties has a hidden, unrevealed agenda—often to dominate or coerce the other individual into compliance or acquiescence of some sort—or lacks basic respect for the rights, dignity, or autonomy of the other party. Disrespect for the other party may include dishonesty. A person engaged in bad faith does not accept the other person as s/he is, but demands that s/he change in order to satisfy his/her requirements or to accept his/her will"
Let's look at what the original comment says:
"representing LBGTQIA and pan, flower, binary, hex, dec and which ever else sexuality exists"
Once again, "lacks basic respect for the rights, dignity, or autonomy of the other party".
I'd say making random sexualities/gender identities up out of sheer disrespect constitutes a lack of basic respect for the rights + dignity of LGBT+ people.
This is why I said before a measure of discernment was needed to understand that they were making a point and not making a bad faith statement. This is your opinion. You didn't prove anything. Perhaps Smuk can speak for themselves instead of you trying to establish intent around their opinion.
-
@Brokenbones said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951461#Comment_2951461
Yeah I mean it's always sad to see content be removed from the game, we lost the Dwight, Meg and Jake masks too.
But BHVR made a call and I don't really disagree with them, no matter what they did people would've complained so they might as well just put a final stop to the whole thing
Yep. My opinion on this is it would've been better to simply leave it alone. There is always going to be toxic people in every gaming community. Those who did this probably see it as a win for them anyway. Whenever things like this happens it just seems to spark more controversy than actually helping solve the problem.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951457#Comment_2951457
No it was a literal dictionary definition bad faith argument
Bad Faith
NOUN
- intent to deceive
Prove it.
-
@Brokenbones said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951447#Comment_2951447
So do you think BHVR is racist for creating the cosmetic and keeping it in the game for such a long time then? Genuine question
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951456#Comment_2951456
Bubba might be a fictional character but the actions of the people playing him aren't. That's the whole point, if all Bubbas were NPCs then I don't think people would have been impacted the way they were.
This is true. This is why individual action to those doing it, backed up by proof that their intent was racially motivated, was the better approach in my opinion. The people who were opposed to these cosmetics being removed had valid points as to why they thought this was a bad idea.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951395#Comment_2951395
making up words to talk the LGBTQ+ community down isn’t „their opinion“ but is actually a „bad faith“ take. And that’s what the comment directly refers to.
They were making a point, a point that required a little discernment to understand. It wasn't a bad faith take. It was their opinion.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951426#Comment_2951426
Except that the cosmetic actually had darker skin (due to missing textures) under the mask, thus actually making it Black Face and therefore was problematic and at least needed fixing. BHVR and the license holder obviously decided it was best to remove the cosmetics.
and it happened often enough to be a problem. several streamers reported this and, you know, having it literally in live streams happening…
Yea if you see a clip of it happening on a stream its going to resonate more than say someone playing the game for over 2000 hours and never seeing it happen at all, like me. Also I don't understand what you mean when you said the cosmetic had darker skin making it black face. Which one are you referring to? Claudette's? Well she is black right? I don't see how a fictional character who wears the face of his victims is doing "black face" by wearing the face of one of his victims. This seems a bit unreasonable to me.
-
@brokedownpalace said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951350#Comment_2951350
I have no idea how many people think this, I'm sure many do. But this was written by one person and upvoted by a few dozen more. Acting like it somehow represents the South Korean community in its entirety is disingenuous (and that's what the title implies). It would be like taking a post from this forum that has 45 upvotes and acting as if it speaks for all of us
Yep! The opinions mentioned in the OP don't represent the entire South Korean community in DBD. Does more than one person in that community share the same opinion? Probably. What matters is the criticism itself and also the fact that a lot of DBD players from other places in the world also share these same views.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
This again? Nobody thought it was going to end racism. The masks were being used as a tool to harass players, so they were removed. I'm convinced people are being willfully obtuse/contrarian about this at this point.
And the masks were also not being used as a tool to harass players also. You have to understand why a lot of people didn't like them removing these cosmetics. The masks were not intrinsically offensive. They were a cosmetic made for a killer who wears the face of his victims. I rarely if ever even saw a cannibal player use these cosmetics to begin with. I can't imagine it was happening so much that they felt the need to remove them.
-
@Marigoria said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2950943#Comment_2950943
Bad faith comments like your first phrase are honestly shameful and shouldnt be allowed on these forums.
I think this is their opinion and not a "bad faith" take. We can disagree with each other but everyone has to be allowed to speak their mind and not have their comments removed because you think its a bad faith comment or simply don't like what they said.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951018#Comment_2951018
It really isn’t that big of a focus when it’s only one tweet among hundreds. It’s clearly parts of the community that currently focuses on the representation and really nothing else.
reports and bugs werent fixed quickly before and won’t miraculously get fixed faster with or without lore having some representation.
This is a fair point. The game in recent time has had a few things done to it that I actually like on the development side of things. The Resident Evil chapter and Haddonfield map update to name a couple things I really like.
That being said, it only takes "one tweet" for example to stir up DBD's very diverse community and keep the conversation about it going. You are right that it is only parts of the community that seem to focus on things like this, but they are part of the community nonetheless. I'd also argue a lot of them are not active on places like the forum here but make their voice heard in how they choose to support the game going forward.
-
@Johnny_XMan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951057#Comment_2951057
Love how “the numbers don’t lie” person has no idea that the LGBT community has “the nunbers” in DBD and that perhaps…. Juuuuuust perhaps BHVR might have noticed this. 😂
If it wasn’t the forums it would be comical.
This is true! This is why its important to discern between opinions and facts. In all fairness they may see representation of lgbt as good for the game going forward based on data. I don't have the data, but I do have experience and in my experience the lgbt community makes up a small portion of gamers, but I could also be wrong.
-
@Marigoria said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2950780#Comment_2950780
So what you are saying is that LGBT representation shouldnt be a thing because, by your own words, most people dont like it?
They can do what they want. What matters when you're selling a product is how many people you reach selling that product. The LGBT community isn't the only people who play video games. In fact I'd argue they are the minority. And of course in all fairness not everyone who doesn't support lgbt is going to stop playing the game because they choose to represent it in their game. But do you think some of them will?
-
@brokedownpalace said:
This is what a handful of South Korean people think**
How do you know its just a handful? I know a lot of people who hold similar views who don't talk about the game on forums and social media.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2950780#Comment_2950780
For someone that doesn't care about the lore how are you still talking about it
You have a poor sense of discernment if you think my reply above was my take on the lore but rather an opinion about how the DBD player base as a whole has differing views on the state of the game. If what the OP mentioned is actual criticism of the game from people who play it then I think that holds some weight to it. I know you felt moved to say something to me in the context you mentioned, but in all honesty it didn't make any sense in the context of what I was talking about. You might want to take a moment to think about what I said next time before replying to me.
-
Survivors don't like to be instant downed at the start of the match. Seems accurate.
-
@Tostapane said:
everything that they said is true sadly.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2950671#Comment_2950671
i think that they meant that the developers gave too much importance to this (overall speaking) rather than the game's health itself (balance)... well, they have a point after all on that matter (it's sufficient to see what they have pinned in the general discussions)... you see, i personally see nothing wrong in doing so, the problem is that you prioritize the wrong stuff at the moment... Before thinking at this kind of stuff they should focus on other aspect (their game)
It doesn't surprise me that some people may see the game this way. I really don't think most gamers care about this stuff and when they do see developers giving focus to social issues like "representation" in their game it could cause them to think they don't really care about the game itself. Whether or not there is any or even some truth to that doesn't matter. At the end of the day what matters is how well your consumers are responding to and receiving your product. Representation of the lgbt community may appeal to some people but it most certainly is not going to appeal to the majority of them.
-
@Pulsar said:
Why should I care what they think?
I'm more concerned with why you asked if you should care what they think. Obviously any company who gives half a crap about their product is going to care what their consumers think about it. As far as why you should care? If you care about this game you'll want to see it received well and spoken of in a good light. Or did they say something that offended you and made you not care what they think about concerning everything else about the game?
-
I think they would have to know you have blood warden to establish any kind of intent there. Even still the leaver penalty is there which works regardless of the reason why anyone left the match. It is an effective deterrent against leaving matches in my opinion. I imagine once someone starts getting up to the half hour mark they start to realize its better to finish the match then have to wait a long period of time to play again. I disagree with the leaver penalty, but it is still effective nonetheless for why it is there.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
If you look back at previous Tomes you will see most are like this. Will have a few where you have to play that killer/survivor and some, where you just need to use their perks. I suspect since David's lore entries haven't been completed this level you'll see some next level where you need to play as him.
Makes me wonder if anyone ever made a thread like this for previous survivor tomes and challenges. Its such a non issue to complain about. And as has been said already, there probably will be a challenge where you have to play as David at some point in the tome which is perfectly fine because its a tome about him. I'll certainly play him to get the challenge done. I'm trying to get the new Meg outfit from the rift and the tome challenges really help the rift grind.