KateMain86
KateMain86
About
- Username
- KateMain86
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932983#Comment_2932983
No, I have repeatedly asked you if you feel the same about other lore additions other than sexuality or even heterosexuality, but you are avoiding to answer my questions. As far as I see, your only problem with lore additions is David king being revealed as gay. And that’s probably the only one you are actually voicing your opinion of - without any arguments.
and of course you can assume they are straight. You can also still assume David is straight. No one is trying to limit your head canon.
Umm... yes. If I were to find out anything I don't like about a character I like I will voice my opinion about it. I found out about David King on twitter. I don't read the tomes or the lore stuff in DBD. Thats why I keep saying less is more. The less I know about these characters the better.
-
@Marigoria said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932940#Comment_2932940
How is it not? By adding LGBT characters to media you're normalizing being LGBT, which is what should happen, because it is normal and shouldn't be treated differently.
Why can't things like this just happen without all the official statements and confirmations and stuff? That doesn't look like normalizing to me. I've always felt its best to leave things like this up to the individual because in the end people are going to get pissed either way when something is made canon in a fictional story that people feel different about.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932940#Comment_2932940
Yes in a video game it is.
No it isn't. :)
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932958#Comment_2932958
No, not safe to assume. Only David’s sexuality is directly revealed, while we do have multiple heterosexual relationships mentioned for other characters, those are not confirmation that they are straight.
they don’t have to tell us the sexuality of every character? That would feel actually forced. If it’s part of the story they want to tell (as it is in David’s case), that’s fine. Otherwise it’s not necessary. Also it was never completely safe to assume anything about David. He did have a girlfriend at some point in his life and this was part of the character and his struggles with his sexuality and accepting who he is.
you know.. you are really making it hard for others to assume this is not about homophobia if you make statements like these…
I think you want to assume that about me for having a dissenting opinion about this, but of course that is just my opinion. Don't forget, less is more. ;)
Until I get an official confirmation about the rest of the roster then I am going to assume they are straight. And again, that is just how I feel about it. Hope you don't have a problem with that especially over fictional characters. :)
-
So just out of curiosity, is it safe to assume the rest of the survivors on the roster are straight since David King is the first and only one to be confirmed as gay? Why not tell us the sexuality of all the survivors in a similar post to the one they made about David King? Because you know, for years it was safe to assume anything about David King without any official confirmation. The same can be said about the rest of the roster. But if David King is going to be confirmed as gay then I must assume the others aren't if they aren't willing to come out now and give an official statement about the rest of them.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932932#Comment_2932932
Have you ever voiced this opinion over any other lore addition in one of the other 10 rifts with all the tome stories? there is always something revealed about characters that wasn’t known before.
I already told you: less is more.
-
@Starrseed said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/321512/lgbtism-either-cant-be-illness-or-phobic
DBD has a big lgbtq community so why not represent them and cater to them? It doesn't hurt any one and just is a nice thing because representation is important.
Not in a video game it isn't.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932898#Comment_2932898
I actually didn’t speak for myself. I don’t care about David King being gay. I just care about equal treatment. For all i care about David can be revealed to have been confused but turned out straight later as long as LGBTQ+ content isn’t explicitly excluded from the game anymore.
your feedback matters, sure. But it’s not the one truth the devs have to deliver to as it’s just your head canon.
David Kings sexuality was never stated before in any way. You can’t conclude his sexuality from any other traits or characteristics.
the creators of David King have decided he is gay. Doesn’t matter if the majority wanted him to be gay or wanted him to be straight or left ambiguous. It’s their character and in the end their decision, no matter what fans say. You can of course voice your opinion that you don’t like it and would rather see him be straight. That’s after all just an opinion. But if you are trying to force them to only make new characters LGBTQ+ and not existing ones while you are okay with existing ones being revealed as straight then there we have not an opinion but something else.
David King has cosmetics that can be purchased with auric cells which cost real money. I think it does matter what the majority of his fans wanted him to be. I personally think its better to leave it to the fans/customers as to what they want them to be and have no official canon stance on anything. Why? Because it removes the risk of pushing people away from something they had valued for a long time. The smallest things or changes can influence whether or not a customer will spend money on something. If I don't ever play David King again, why would I spend money on him? I've spent a lot of money on this game. I've also changed my mind about spending a lot of money on it based on many different things. Everything matters and in the world of making profit the whole "less is more" thing is actually a pretty good idea when it comes to things like this.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932891#Comment_2932891
uhm… have you seen fan art of David King before?
People against David King being gay are probably in the minority, most people actually don’t care or are in favour of it. So you pretty much answered yourself why it’s okay that he was revealed to be gay
Nope. Never have seen fanart of him like that. And no you don't speak for "most people." You speak for yourself. And if you want to use fanart as evidence of customer feedback for demand of making him gay then by that logic countless other fictional characters may as well be too. The idea of David King being gay has never once crossed my mind in the 2000+ hours I've put in this game. In fact I've always seen him as the exact opposite. Does my feedback about him matter?
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932880#Comment_2932880
and why should the devs care about what you personally play video games for?
there are plenty of other players and it’s their medium.
it doesn’t feel natural to be against representation this much when it literally doesn’t change anything at all about the game but some flavor text about a fictional character. And it’s not very random? It’s the 11th rift, every rift came with new stories for at least 2 characters, adding to their backstories and fleshing them out as defined characters. Why should they limit themselves to not reveal an existing character as LGBTQ+ but only new ones? Especially when heterosexual relationships were added the same way and no one complained about it.
Why should they care about what I personally play video games for? Did you really just ask that? What the hell do you think surveys are for? Businesses have entire departments around this very subject to better their product. I highly doubt making David King gay was a conclusion based on customer feedback about this character.
And by the way, its how its done that matters.
-
@GentlemanFridge said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932880#Comment_2932880
Paywall + risk of being accused of tokenism.
I feel like people are going to see this as tokenism too. If they had just released a new character like this I don't think anyone would honestly care. This however just feels lazy.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932867#Comment_2932867
Why is this only relevant with LGBTQ+ representation though?
literally everything else in the lore such as heterosexual relationships are equally as unnecessary. But still, people only have a problem with this when it’s about LGBTQ+… makes you wonder why
Its not. I don't play video games to see how well something from real life is represented in it. This doesn't feel organic. This doesn't feel natural. This was a very random thing to do to a character that has been around for years. Why not just make a new character if they wanted to do this? I can promise you I won't be jumping for joy and scream yay representation if they announce any particular character as being straight. It is not relevant or necessary in a freaking video game.
-
@GannTM said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2930818#Comment_2930818
Do you people ever think about anything but yourselves?
Excuse me? You people? What the hell is that supposed to mean?
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932856#Comment_2932856
Why do you care so much that they're implementing representation?
Because its not necessary and I don't want video games that exist in a fantasy world to turn into social statements concerning reality?
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2922498#Comment_2922498
Would it be disingenuous if they wrote a tome for David that made him straight?
Existing characters are perfectly valid, and since BHVR like doing lore through tomes, it makes more sense to make their first big push for representation an existing character so they can use a tome to explore it.
Why the hell does DBD need to have a "big push for representation"? Why do you care about them doing this?
-
@JimbusCrimbus said:
Cool?
As a fellow gay person myself, here's the part where I don't really care. shrug lol
Ohhhh they retroactively made a character gay. Big POG. It took them YEARS to do that. But yes, let's give them all the praise in the world, for taking this long, do to something as important as representation, and half-assing it like normal.
Yep. I agree. The way this was done just felt so... wrong. To me it was like picking a random number out of a hat and trying to make a big deal about it when the number was something everyone is already familiar with. What would've been so hard about making a new original character for whatever you wanted to use to represent something? And by the way, we get it. You guys support lgbt. Good... great... how many more charms are you going to release with a rainbow on it before you realize that we do in fact get it? Which survivor are you going to pick next to be something entirely out of left field? This whole thing just feels so cringe.
-
@Crowman said:
If there was a build that could reliably allow you to wiggle off the killer after being downed then the meta would become everyone is slugged till death.
Self wiggle build will always be weak because it's a build that cannot be strong.
Again, like everyone else, you're not getting the point and jumping to a hard conclusion on this. I am merely asking for hooks to spawn a little further apart. That does not guarantee anything and it most certainly would not prevent killers from ever hooking anyone. As far as slugging goes, I already believe that slugging should punish killers who do it. If a killer leaves a survivor on the ground for too long then that survivor should be able to recover naturally. You know it makes no sense that a killer can grab a survivor, drop them, and they bleed to death... from a grab. Come on now be reasonable.
-
@Stroggz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932826#Comment_2932826
wiggling, in my opinion, is a mechanic that exists from preventing carrieng a surv around like a bag, not for you to use it as a second chance. its already kinda abused with library and BO. If there must something to be done -- adding more hooks, not moving them further.
I'm sorry but this is a completely bias opinion. You literally said add more hooks. Do you even play survivor? If you do, you might want to take another look at hook spawns next time and see for yourself how close some of them are often. Your opinion on wiggling being there only to prevent killers from carrying survivors around indefinitely also sounds very bias. This mechanic falls under the same idea of the way no mither works. If you leave a survivor on the ground for too long they can pick themselves up. Well, if a killer picks a survivor up and doesn't hook them, or hook them in a fair amount of time, then yes that survivor should be able to wiggle off. Why does it sound like you think killers should be entitled to a hook if they down a survivor? Me on the other hand I am just asking for hooks to spawn a little further apart which doesn't guarantee anything but just that... hooks being a little further apart.
-
@SuzuKR said:
That is literally the point. You are not supposed to reliably wiggle off by yourself literally ever, or that would be completely gamebreakingly overpowered. Hatch needed a nerf, it was a horribly designed mechanic.
No it is not the point. There are perks in the game that help with wiggling off the killer. They are there for a reason. Not to guarantee anything but to give you a better chance to escape the killer. The fact that we have these perks is proof to me that we are indeed supposed to have, at least to an extent, a reliable way to wiggle off the killer more often than if we did not use them. What you said was completely wrong.
-
@Stroggz said:
So you want to loop forever with dead hard and then to wiggle out keeping the hook super away? Sounds fun.
You kind of just proved you didn't read half of what I said in the OP. First, I literally said the builds I used neglected perks like dead hard in favor of having more power leaned towards one thing. Second, the implication of my post was never what you said in yours. How can you read that and come to a conclusion like that without having a bias view on this subject? Do you think maybe I just want survivors to have a little better chance at wiggling off and in no way implied I want forever loops?
-
You want something that has only a 4% chance to happen removed from the game? Do you know the last time I saw someone pull themselves off the hook without deliverance? It was literally months ago. I can't even remember the last time I did it. That is how rare it is. Seriously I can't believe posts like this are made.
-
I figure it was just something that happened after an update because I think I have seen these cosmetics look like this before for awhile and they were fixed later. This has been awhile now since these cosmetics changed now and they still look the same so I don't know if it was something with the update it happened in or if they changed them. I wish I knew. I just checked them again tonight and the cosmetics still look the same. I hope they fix them soon.
-
@Crowman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2884163#Comment_2884163
All you are saying is that a killer winning is toxic.
No, I am saying a killer slugging the 3rd survivor for several minutes at a CHANCE for the 4k is toxic. So you think its Ok for killers to only take out 2 survivors to win? Meanwhile we have to do 5 generators, probably cleanse hex totems and open an exit gate. But yea, sure. Go ahead and try to make the argument that killers who get 2k deserve to win the match. Ridiculous!
-
@Shaped said:
I guess wanting 4e is toxic as well.
Don't get me wrong I understand bleeding out on the ground is not pleasant but blame the hatch mechanic instead.
I am not one of them, but some people want to 4k and there is nothing wrong about it imo, just like with people who want everyone to escape and hook trade for eternity.
If 2 survivors are already dead there is no wanting 4 escapes to happen. Its killers being extremely toxic and making someone miserable so they can have a chance at 4k. No it is not the hatch mechanic doing this. Killers always have the advantage in finding the hatch. They move faster and can go across the map a lot quicker than the survivors.
-
@Crowman said:
If the killer has already killed the other 2 survivors, they've already won. IF they want to slug the 3rd to get their 4K, they do deserve it at that point.
No, they do not. You are approving of one of the most toxic things a killer can do to a survivor in this game. The mere fact you say if the killer has already killed the other 2 survivors they've already won shows you're either being disingenuous or you're just bias. You should know it is not impossible for the last survivor to win if 2 are dead and 1 is slugged. I have seen so many 4th survivors finish the last gen, get the 3rd survivor up and both escape. If a killer has to play that toxic to get 4k then they didn't win anything. All they did was make the game miserable for others so they could think they got some kind of victory when really all they did was leave a survivor on the ground for several minutes at a CHANCE they would find the last one. For them to get an entire bleed out bar's time to search the map for the 4th survivor is unfair. Slugging ruins this game. Its not fun. Its not fair and it is VERY toxic.
-
I 100% agree with the OP. Don't forget slugging! Killers that leave survivors on the ground when there is no other survivor in sight is literally interfering with that survivor being slugged to enjoy the game in my opinion.
-
Had one today that tunneled me down, hit me on the hook and shook their character no at me because I cleansed their devour hope totem. I guess when you lose that bad you gotta make up for it by being toxic.
-
@deKlaw_04 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2850310#Comment_2850310
Did you buy all of her cosmetics?
Nope and I'm not buying anymore until all of her currents ones are fixed.
-
@Rogue11 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2850310#Comment_2850310
Not sure why they would intentionally make most of Kate's outfits look worse, but i guess it wouldn't be the first time. The waistlines that were changed clip horribly in game.
She's also still missing her bra straps on her default shirt/recolors, and the flag shirt lost its "physics" in the latest update.
Yep, they look terrible now in my opinion. I also didn't know her old glory knotted t-shirt was messed up... again... It really pisses me off how Kate's cosmetics keep getting messed up. I literally am not buying anymore cosmetics for her until this crap is fixed and if the current ones I do have aren't fixed soon I'm requesting a refund. I bought those cosmetics for how they looked at the time I purchased them. I don't want something I paid for to change unless I'm going to be offered a refund for them.
-
So the cosmetics mentioned in my original post still look the same. I'm wondering if this was an intentional change or something that happened with a patch update. Can anyone confirm?
-
@Crowman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2841970#Comment_2841970
Why does being casual to you mean not even attempting to be decent at the game.
Like hitting skill checks are not hard and a very simple mechanic to get used to. But somehow you want to turn this into a refusal to even learn to hit skill checks, because you are a casual.
I think your ideal of what a casual player is, is completely warped. Casual players can certainly learn how to engage in simple mechanics that a game has. What you are trying to define is a bad player who refuses to even try to learn how to play a game, because it would bruise their own ego if they admitted they weren't good at a game.
I can hit the skill checks. Not always though. I almost hit them all completely just before the generator got done recently and I was super focused on it. They are pretty difficult to hit them all until the gen is done. I'm looking at this from a broader perspective. This perk is going to be highly effective in prolonging matches and getting more chases to happen. My concern with it is I feel like it is going to be too effective. I get the idea behind it, but when a perk is too effective it becomes problematic. Killers already have really guild anti gen builds available. I can only imagine what is going to be thought of now that this perk is out.
-
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2841682#Comment_2841682
I'm pretty sure all casual Survivors already learned how to hit the Skill-Checks while you're still here complaining about it
An insult for the sake of insulting, knowing full well this is not true. If you're not here to offer something of substantive value to the conversation kindly remove yourself it.
-
Yea sure if you want to cripple the game and cause a mass exodus of survivors from the game go for it. Remove 50% pallets and see what happens. You have got to be kidding me. The maps need MORE pallets if anything.
-
@SuzuKR said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2841696#Comment_2841696
Skill issue. Git gud.
No substance. Unreasonable. Irrational. "Git gud" is not the norm for many if not most players who are just trying to play a scary game with their friends. The more skill focused DBD gets the less fun its going to be for a lot of people.
-
@SuzuKR said:
Hit the skill checks.
You mean get pulled off the generator because I'm forced to hard focus nearly impossible skill checks? Got it.
-
@HaunterofShadows said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2840521#Comment_2840521
I mean he's not exactly wrong. This is pretty much the yellow glyph skill checks. Once you get used to it the skill checks are not that hard. I mean the yellow glyphs seem to be the most popular glyphs out there. Buy yeah....you'll get used to it. Also it's once a gen. That seems like this makes it more or less a fair perk.
Yea everyone I played with doing that challenge hated it. They are not the most popular glyphs out there. My point is this is an annoying thing survivors are going to have to just get used to and expect every match. More frustration on top of the already frustration that exists.
-
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2841063#Comment_2841063
So you're saying the game should be balanced around Survivors being bad at the game?
So you think casual players are by default "bad at the game?" Stereotyping isn't helping your argument here. The expectation that the casual players, which ARE the majority, should be on the same level as the elite players is unrealistic and unreasonable. This game is played by many people who just want to play a scary game with their friends. Most players aren't trying to break down the math of pallet looping. Not everyone wants to hard focus every match. So yes, the game should be balanced around CASUAL survivors.
-
@Crowman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2840459#Comment_2840459
It sounds like you just need to get better at the game.
It sounds like you have unreasonable expectations for casual players. Get better at the game... give me a break. How can I be prepared for skill checks like that when they were never in the game like that other than that glyph challenge? Now survivors all have to assume the killer has yet another perk in their loadout. This is just another thing survivor mains are going to have to worry about every match and I feel like its going to get old fast.
-
@SuzuKR said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2840986#Comment_2840986
Good job on missing the point. I'm clearly talking about the progress itself not being 100% on their end.
I don't know why you expect anyone to care about your opinion if you don't care about any opposing ones. "The fact the killer reached a hook means you failed to wiggle off. The progress at that point is irrelevant, the hooking started. It should take priority over wiggle. I don't care if the survivor reached 100%, it doesn't matter for ME." See how that works?
Think for a moment what the hook rate is compared to the wiggle off rate. In fact I'd love to see some data on that if its out there. Killers getting a hook is common. Survivors wiggling off the killer is rare.
-
@Crowman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2840902#Comment_2840902
You can't just ignore high skill play completely unless you want the game to burn out players because there's no reason to actually get good at the game if it's unbalanced at the top.
Just because you don't want to improve doesn't mean no one does.
Everyone improves to an extent just by playing. My issue is the game should not be a constant skill improvement to enjoy it. Everyone should not be forced to play like the few who can run killers for days with ease. Its unreasonable. I never said I don't want to improve. I said I don't want a video game to turn into a job just to be better at it. You can't expect everyone to improve to the skill level of elite players. Its just not going to happen.
-
@SuzuKR said:
Sounds like a you problem.
"And please don't feed me this "well the wiggle bar wasn't actually 100% when the killer hooked you." I don't care. On MY screen it was."
No one cares what you think either. By the same logic, on the killer's screen it probably wasn't. Latency exists. Get over it.
The killer doesn't see the wiggle bar.
-
@TragicSolitude said:
No, it should favor the killer. The killer sunk time into the chase, the killer won the chase, the killer sunk time into getting the survivor to the hook. During this time the killer has put into one survivor, the other three should be getting gens done. It's a huge huge loss for the killer when a survivor gets off his shoulder. Something that punishing shouldn't be easy to pull off.
Yeah, I hate getting hooked when it looks like I should've wiggled off, but it's better this way. The more often survivors get off killers' shoulders, the more killers will slug. I often start majorly slugging if a single survivor gets off my shoulder, or even if there's just the threat of it with hook sabo'ing or Boil Over. This more than anything else leads to disconnects in my matches, so it makes me think that many survivors do not like being slugged.
The other day I was in a match on the RPD map. I got hooked in one of the halls and there was another hook in the corner at the end of the hall right in front of me. It would take the killer 2 seconds to move to it from the hook I was on it was so close. Do you know how often survivors wiggle off before being hooked without team intervention? In my 2000 hours of survivor experience it has probably happened less than 20 times for me. Wiggling off the killer is such a rare thing for survivors. You gotta see it from the survivor perspective also. If the bar reaches 100% on their screen and they get nothing for it, how do you think it makes them feel?
-
@Crowman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2840191#Comment_2840191
Because the devs are catering their balance towards lower skill casual survivors.
Which they should, because theres without a doubt way more casual lower skill survivors than elite ones. Why do you have a problem with this? Video games aren't a job and most people don't want to devote endless hours of focus and practice to get better at something that is supposed to be entertainment and a distraction from the real world.
-
I'm pretty disappointed there was no new map with this chapter. So many things they could've done with one too. The Resident Evil chapter came with the coolest map in the game. Content is important. The new killer is scarier than most to play against though I think some of her perks are OP.
-
@fulltonon said:
If anything, skill checks could be removed and force every generators to block for 20 seconds at 90% and we can still call it fair because it only happens once.
I'd much rather deal with that than these ridiculous skill checks.
-
@Rooftopper said:
once per gen per trial is not OP
But its almost a guarantee punish for survivors for working on a generator. Again you're going to see a lot of gens worked up to 70% and left alone because no one is going to want to deal with those skill checks. Its too much. The perk should be redesigned.
-
@ThanksForDaily said:
I agree if someone DC in the first 2 mins. Give an option to place you automatically on death hook.
Idc for the points tbh from these games, I just want to go to the next one.
Umm... or.. you know... perhaps a forfeit option that doesn't require dying on a hook?
-
As of last night I noticed the cosmetics I mentioned are still different from the way they looked before the last patch. If they aren't going to be fixed then I would hope to get a full refund for each of the mentioned cosmetics. When I buy a cosmetic in game I buy it because I like the way it looks at the time I purchased it.
-
@Rogue11 said:
They really can't stop making her cosmetics worse huh. Yes, I'm still pissed about the disaster that is the reworked "golden cascade" hair. Good to know more cosmetics that I spent money on are being changed...
Yep! Exactly. I haven't reported it as a bug yet. I'm sure by now they are aware so I expect this to be fixed soon if it hasn't already. I haven't been in game since the lunar event ended so I don't know if they are fixed yet.
-
To correct the OP, tunneling and camping are in fact toxic and should be recognized as unsportsmanlike.