KayTwoAyy
KayTwoAyy
About
- Username
- KayTwoAyy
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Akumakaji said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3187919#Comment_3187919
Interesting thought ... but you know how often people DC when you run Lethal Pursuer and they go down within 40s of the game starting? Sure, this gives the killer definitely a legs up, but when the killing is running off to patrol the next gen, you basically lost nothing. Yeah, you got one hook stage and need to play it a bit saver, but this alone is not as bad as, for example, losing one of your totem 40s into a game, and a killer can still play a good game after such an early loss.
People who rage quit just at the start of the trial because they got a bad start ARE ruining it for all the others, and with no real reason to do so. Its just sore loser attitude, not "a victim lashing out".
I don't disagree with the sentiment that there are bad reasons to disconnect. Nor do I disagree with the negative impact it has on the remaining players' game. I'm just saying that the disconnecting players are not the root of the problem, and we shouldn't be focusing our efforts on punishing them.
Telling people to "suck it up" has never worked. That just creates more animosity.
Through all of the noise on these forums, there are some really great ideas that get tossed aside because people assume everyone else is a crybaby who had one bad experience and is overreacting. You can spot those posts from a mile away--there's no reason to discredit the ones bringing real grievances to the table.
This game has redeeming qualities, but it is far from perfect. We need to be solution-oriented, amenable, and focus on what we can do to remove the least enjoyable moments this game has to offer.
-
@SuzuKR said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3187906#Comment_3187906
Imagine calling ragequitters the victims, LOL
Take a minute and think about it. It is worth your time.
Is their action hypocritical? Yeah, thats usually what happens when a victim creates victims of their own.
You should listen to people's actions, not discredit them.
-
This is some next level victim-blaming.
Where am I going to "take it up with the devs?"
I'm not an influencer. I don't have the type of platform that would catch the devs' attention. Even if I did, it doesn't seem like that would work.
The Feedback section of these forums is a wasteland. If you post directly to Feedback your post just dies with zero traction, invalidating the issue by making it look unrelatable and/or unproblematic.
People don't feel like their voice is being heard, so they take action.
We see this in the real world; verbal outcry turns to protests turns to rioting. It is a natural escalation process, and it is all symptomatic of a larger problem. In this case, the game.
-
@Lobos said:
Wow.. Imagine demanding gameplay changes because of one bad trial experience.. This whole circular rant comes off as immature and entitled, and I say that as a Survivor main myself.
I've had this happen to me many times before and it's really not a big deal. Hook suicide to give that person a chance for the hatch, or try for the Kobe! Besides, like others here have already pointed out. It was an acceptable play for the Dwight and there is a challenge to escape through the hatch right now too.
I dare you to draw more wrong conclusions about me, and respond with an even more useless, abject comment.
-
@Lochnload_exe said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/346410/riveting-gameplay
You are the only one left lol it is literally the right play. Hide and get hatch, don't keep carrying out a lost match.
You are the only one left
False.
Watch "Riveting Gameplay" on Streamable. -
@pseudechis said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3186423#Comment_3186423
"Yes. Survivors should have a clear objective, and Killers should have a clear objective.
In every game, there should be a clear objective." They do have a clear objective, survivors need to repair gens and escape, killers need to eliminate survivors, what about that isn't clear.
Anything goes within the confines of those two objectives providing its within the games rules.
None of that means Dwight is obligated to save your butt if things are going south. There is an avenue for escape that doesn't involve teamwork (the hatch) and you can choose to fall back on it if you want but you don't get much for doing that its better to participate in the clearly defined objective.
Q and A. Time
You think I want the game changed BECAUSE OF this Dwight? Like some kind of evil villain arc, you think this is the worst thing to ever happen to me--my life has been drastically changed for the worse--and now I'm here trying to enact my revenge? No, but your original post is just a context free dig at BHVR, that was clearly made while not happy about the game, you've tried to rationalize it since but it clearly comes from a place of emotion and not logic. You're over the top framing of this question doesn't really help to paint you as rational in this exchange either.
Buddy, I think I've made it pretty clear here that I'm not some 10-hour Andy throwing their first babyrage rant up on the forums because I didn't like something that happened to me. Again while there is no tone in text it comes off as kinda ragey and emotional. Doesn't matter how many hours you have in game its not just new players who rage at the game.
Is that why you're discrediting me? Do you think I'm just babyraging? A lil bit but you don't seem to need much help from me because as I already pointed out look at your original post, does it seem like something someone would post seriously if in a rational and calm head space at the time?
Riveting gameplay, with a photo covered in writing and a bunch of question marks signed thanks BHVR, now if it was tongue and cheek dig at the game sure but you've since doubled down on wanting game changes to punish what you see as an unfair outcome.
When what people have pointed out what they see here is a smart play by Dwight to secure a hatch escape after his team started failing at the objective. But as you've pointed out "This post ain't about whether or not Dwight made the right play."
"This post is about the impact Dwight's decision had on other players' experience, and the fact that his decision was well rewarded, despite the negative impact it had on others."
Your game experience was negative because of a team mates in game choices. People shouldn't be rewarded if they make decisions that might impact the team negatively. Would you agree that this is a fair assessment of your point?
Would you also agree that making a good choice for yourself can sometimes trump making a good choice for the team in terms of personal game experience and likelihood of escape?
Scenarios where you take the selfish option should then be attenuated by lower BP's, MMR and pips. Making selfish actions less desirable over team oriented ones but still possible if the situation calls for it.
I'm pretty sure hatch escapes already don't increase MMR, not sure how they affect pips and BP's (should probably count for less though) but overall playing for the hatch is already less rewarding than trying to complete the team objective so what's the problem really?
Your game experience was negative because of a team mates in game choices. People shouldn't be rewarded if they make decisions that might impact the team negatively. Would you agree that this is a fair assessment of your point?
Yes, this is a fair assessment of my point.
Would you also agree that making a good choice for yourself can sometimes trump making a good choice for the team in terms of personal game experience and likelihood of escape?
Sometimes, yes. This frequently occurs in end-game when survivors do not have the resources to save someone on hook.
Scenarios where you take the selfish option should then be attenuated by lower BP's, MMR and pips. Making selfish actions less desirable over team oriented ones but still possible if the situation calls for it.
I would venture to say that lower bloodpoints is an insufficient punishment for poor performance. It is a superficial measurement of skill, and is not the main objective of the game.
If you cannot do what it takes to complete your objective, you have not earned the reward your objective is supposed to provide you.
-
@TragicSolitude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3186423#Comment_3186423
It's not even just the hatch. Besides helping with your own escape, it doesn't matter what happens to teammates at all.
For example, just watched the only match my friend is going to play today. Went against a Pig. Friend did 3 gens and healed teammates and went for saves, all that team player stuff. Unfortunately for him, he was the last one the Pig chased. Four gens done. He runs Empathy, so for the majority of his chase he got to watch his teammates do jack. Hell, one of them was even teabagging on top of the Grim Pantry building for no good reason when he was running up it during the chase. (They didn't actually try to take aggro, so I really have no idea what they were doing.) Anyway, two of the survivors finally got on a gen together. My friend got downed, helmet went on, final gen popped before he was even put on the hook. That was it, he was dead. Not even a question. His teammates screwed him. The three of them escaped and he died. Does it matter to them? Not in the least. Has no effect on them whatsoever. Did he need to die? No. That's the frustrating thing. His death was completely unnecessary and preventable, it could've been four people escaping easily, but teammates don't have to care. If they had worked on the gen sooner, he would've been fine. If they'd held off popping it, he would've had a chance. Instead, they popped it at the worst time, and it didn't make a lick of difference to them.
It's one thing to die when you're working with your team, and it's another to die because your team screwed you. One is a meaningful death that happens when you're having fun and helping your team, and the other is a frustrating byproduct of bad game design. Being a team should matter.
(For reference, my friend died with 22k. The survivor with the most got 26k and the one with the least got 20k. Had my friend not died, he would've earned the most. Escaping awards 7k Bloodpoints, so it's no little thing.)
The game is fun when survivors work together and play as a team. The game is not fun when it feels like your teammates don't give a crap about you. It feels like it's you against a killer and three other people. That sucks.
Sorry, I'm also kinda just venting. I was frustrated watching that happen to my friend. I've had it happen to me enough times to know how bad it feels. And I've seen it happen playing Piggy myself, in which case I often try to make sure the survivor gets the hatch or something because dude, their team absolutely screwed them.
Sorry your friend had to play through that--been there and definitely know how frustrating that situation is.
Pig might not be the most lethal killer, but she is prone to moments like that where one or two survivors feel cheated by their teammates' lax performance. It is especially frustrating when you feel like you've done the heavy lifting, and your teammates goof off because you've enabled them to feel a sense of security in what should otherwise be a tense game of tug-of-war.
In the grand scheme of things, DBD might just be a game, but as humans we want to feel as though our time is being rewarded. Dying for a team that is trying their best is rewarding, even if the game itself is frustrating to play through. Dying for a team that couldn't care less what happens to you leaves a sour taste in the mouth.
Its especially unfortunate, because people sweep these problems under the rug by saying "just play SWF." I can no longer tell whether they're short-sighted or indifferent like the teammates in your anecdote.
-
@pseudechis said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3186008#Comment_3186008
"Survivors cannot win a 3v1 against an adequately matched killer. I assume you accept that as fact," you assume wrong, never assume its bad form. Its more than possible for a 3v1 to come out in the survivors favour. Maybe not so much at 4-5 gens left but if you are at 3v1 in that scenario your team has dropped the ball already. Its gonna be hard but not impossible.
"Any one survivor can enter the trial deciding not to advance the objective, and play solely for hatch (as it appears this Dwight did)" Did he though? you're attributing the the whole team's loss to his choice to play selfish after the team was going down hard at 4 gens up anyway. Yeah it didn't help but the blame likely doesn't solely rest with Dwight.
Yes it was an uphill battle and the Dwight likely decided to save his own butt rather than yours or anyone else's and that's his in game choice.
Altruism and selfishness are choices in game, the emblem and BP system rewards altruism but it comes with he risk of exposure and death meaning it could cost you an escape. Selfishness comes with the likelihood of escape but little reward in other areas.
You seem to fail to grasp that this choice is part of the game and adds to its variety of game outcome. These are not glaring design issues they are the result of freedom of choice in game and the ability to react to how games are playing out.
You are assuming that Dwight came into the game wanting to solely play for hatch from the get go and that assumption alone makes up your whole point and so we come full circle to my first point. Don't assume it leads to weak arguments.
It shouldn't be part of the game... why not? You want every game to play out the same way?
Survivors should always be forced to do X, killers should always be forced to do Y?
Let me submit a hypothesis, I'm not assuming anything this is a idea submitted for you to consider and rebuke if you wish...
You died in game, you saw Dwight not trying to save anyone, you got angry about how unjust that felt, that anger created a narrative where Dwight's sole motivation was to just play for hatch from the get go, which justifies you being angry about it and now you want game changes so that people are punished for this play because you got angry that its not fair.... Think about it.
If you are concerned about people not being punished for playing for hatch then they don't get MMR increases or many BP's or emblem points so they are already punished via game mechanics.
It shouldn't be part of the game... why not? You want every game to play out the same way? Survivors should always be forced to do X, killers should always be forced to do Y?
Yes. Survivors should have a clear objective, and Killers should have a clear objective.
In every game, there should be a clear objective.
Imagine I'm playing you in chess, and you're about to checkmate me when I say "actually, I have a trapdoor on this board that my king is going to jump into. ggs mate, you tried." Next time we square up for chess, you might as well ask me to just jump in the trapdoor immediately and save us both from wasted time.
You devalue the real win condition when you add in a second (or third, or fourth, etc.) win condition that players can fall back on when they fail to meet their actual win condition. Why ever strive for the first win condition, when the second win condition is always there and can be reached with with greater ease?
What is even your hypothesis?
You think I want the game changed BECAUSE OF this Dwight? Like some kind of evil villain arc, you think this is the worst thing to ever happen to me--my life has been drastically changed for the worse--and now I'm here trying to enact my revenge?
Buddy, I think I've made it pretty clear here that I'm not some 10-hour Andy throwing their first babyrage rant up on the forums because I didn't like something that happened to me.
Is that why you're discrediting me? Do you think I'm just babyraging?
Because there is substance to my argument here. Substance that you and others, for some reason completely unbeknownst to me, are repeatedly sidestepping in favor of "suck it up, its just a game."
Yeah, well... game sucks, it needs improvements.
-
@HectorBrando said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3186292#Comment_3186292
What are you on about? Your main argument is that being left on hook by someone sucks, especially if that person gets rewarded with hatch which is true. My argument is "that game was doomed, there was no point in rescuing you and dragging it" which also holds true. I didnt raise a different issue, Im just telling you why what Dwight did is justified.
Also
Survivors are designed to work together
They are also designed to ditch each other if the need arises, this is taken LITERALLY from DBD Steam store page.
I can't believe I actually have to say this AGAIN.
My point:
Your response of...
does nothing to address the "this is bad for the game" part of my argument--which is the entire issue at hand.
Survivors have not been "designed to ditch eachother." The DBD Steam store page might say that survivors CAN be selfish. But survivors have not been DESIGNED to be selfish. I hope you see that distinction.
By design, only one survivor can escape this way, and to do so requires that survivor to not engage with the game.
If every survivor plays this way, the game falls apart. It no longer becomes fun and engaging, and seeing as video games are a source of entertainment, they need to answer the question of "is this fun and engaging?"
Thus, bringing us full circle to "this is bad game design."
-
@HectorBrando said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3186218#Comment_3186218
Whataboutism is when someone exposes an argument and someone else retorts with "yeah sure, but what about this different thing?", biggest example on this forum is "X is busted" "yeah sure, but Y is busted too".
You are complaining someone got rewarded for letting you die on hook and some of us are arguing back its normal when the game is in an unwinnable situation, some people value getting out of unwinnable games sooner than fighting to the bitter end, that Dwight was the first kind of player and you were on the receving end, thats all there is too this thread.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3186226#Comment_3186226
Odds are he was dropping/picking the key Ada brought into the match, Clairvoyance+Key is almost a 100% escape.
Whataboutism is also raising a different issue, which is exactly what you're doing. It's so cringe; this is how every forum post goes, and people wonder why it takes forever for anything to get done around here.
You continue to disregard the argument I'm trying to make. So much so, that I've needed to clarify what I'm talking about (despite it being quite clear) multiple times now.
Instead of addressing the points I've brought forth, you cherry picked half of my statement and pivoted to another theoretical, then rounded out your response with "suck it up."
---
None of what you've said has been constructive, while I'm raising a real issue here.
---
I'll say it for the nth time. Maybe you'll finally to respond to it, maybe you'll ignore it again, or maybe you'll decide to walk away.
Survivors are designed to work together. BY DESIGN, they cannot all survive without working as a team. They are NOT DESIGNED to FFA, therefore the FFA incentives in this game are unhealthy. BHVR is trying to have it both ways here, and their indifference towards this issue creates a ton of animosity between survivors.
-
Ever since I saw your killswitch comment, about killswitching everything except for Pyramid Head, I knew to look out for your future posts lol
"i just want to spend an eternity in torment" had me dying
-
@HectorBrando said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3186008#Comment_3186008
Survivors cannot win a 3v1 against an adequately matched killer
You are leaving out important information, Survivors cannot win a 3vs1 against an adequately matched killer WHEN there are 4 gens left. Survivors can win 3vs1 with 1 or 2 gens left, its quite common actually.
And to be honest, Survivors can win 3vs1 against 4 gens too but is rare, so rare its not worth trying, there is a point where the match is so heavily skewed towards one side is not worth keep trying, especially when you dont have queues, just get it over fast and jump onto the next.
Being able to count your loses and calling quits then restart again before wasting more time is a part of playing games, not everything has to be a fight to the last drop of blood.
Stop whataboutism'ing me. We're not talking about 1 or 2 gens left. We're talking about the fact that survivors can deliberately sabotage their teammate's game, from the outset, with zero repurcussions to their behavior.
Keep up, please.
The "every man for themself" element of DBD is bad for the game. Period.
DBD is not a FFA. It is a team game for survivors, and BHVR needs to get in that lane.
-
@Nihlus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3185299#Comment_3185299
He clearly was doing something in all that time or he would have gotten crows. He had to do something more than just stand there. That said, I agree with the sentiments others have said. You are not a team. Sure, you can act like one sometimes, but the fact of the matter is that the game is designed in a way that says the other survivors are only worth keeping alive if it helps you survive. That's why the MMR is entirely based on escapes. No one is under any obligation to throw themselves at the hook for you just as you are under no obligation to throw yourself onto one for him. Hook trading is very bad practice. It leads your entire team towards death faster. It's not altruistic. It's throwing. You're giving the killer free hits and downs just to save someone one hook state... which you may not even accomplish as they could be downed 10-15 seconds later.
Think of it this way. Every survivor was pulled from the real world into this realm of eternal torment. What does saving someone else really do? Spare them a single instance of pain? As soon as the trial is over, Steve, Claudette, Meg, etc, they're all going right back in to be tortured more and so are you. After countless days, weeks, months, decades, centuries, who knows how long inside the entity's realm, almost every survivor would have such horrific PTSD that they would all do anything to spare themselves from being sacrificed one more time if they can. Even the mightest soldier would break after being tortured for countless years.
He clearly was doing something
I don't know if you noticed (it appears many did not), but I linked to gameplay to show exactly what the Dwight was doing. He was picking up and dropping an item to avoid getting crows. He did this for over 2 minutes. The video shows the moment I was thrown on hook, and the still image I posted initially shows how he is still standing upstairs at the end of my struggle phase.
I have video footage of the second minute I spent on hook, and it is just more of the same. I would have included it, but it is more work for me to censor the names in the video than screenshot the moment before I was sacrificed.
This entire post (see above comment) is about how the "you are not a team" game design conflicts with the "you cannot win a 3v1" design. It is a huge problem, and that is my entire quarrel here. If Dwight wants to ruin his game by letting me die on hook, fine. But he shouldn't be rewarded for throwing his team to the wolves when I cannot escape without his help.
Watch "Riveting Gameplay" on Streamable. -
@pseudechis said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3185236#Comment_3185236
but to punish it is you affecting his license. Don’t kid yourself about the topic it’s very clear that you want the Dwight to fail for playing selfish.
Well guess what selfish will net you more rewards in a lot of circumstances.
I get the point you are making but it has all these rather negative undertows that undermine it.
Dwight made a play to increase his chances of survival and *drum beat* it increased his chances of survival.
Why get angry about it move on already, it’s just part of the game.
@HectorBrando said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3185236#Comment_3185236
And I understand your line of thinking, the guy was egotistical it that affected your survival options and he got rewarded for his egoism but the truth is, the game was already over and it was either rescuing you and then someone dying after god knows how many minutes or just let you die and go for hatch, that match was going to end with 1 person looking for hatch anyway, may aswell make it faster and you just happened to be caught instead of him.
From my point of view he made you a favor by letting you go sooner so you could hop in a new match.
You're completely missing the point here.
@pseudechis your "it's just part of the game" attitude completely disregards my message. It shouldn't be part of the game. That is the point.
Survivors cannot win a 3v1 against an adequately matched killer. I assume you accept that as fact, because you support the Dwight for declaring our 3v1 to be a "hatch game," even though you have no information about how far into the match we were, and how much gen progress was made on any other generator (for all you know, we could have had 3+ gens over 50% progress, but only 1 complete).
Any one survivor can enter the trial deciding not to advance the objective, and play solely for hatch (as it appears this Dwight did). This strategy has been made even more viable in recent patches, with perks like Sole Survivor, Wake Up, Low Profile, Left Behind, and a key in-hand.
The two above sentences;
Survivors cannot win a 3v1 against an adequately matched killer.
and
Any one survivor can enter the trial deciding not to advance the objective, and play solely for hatch
are glaring design issues.
If survivors cannot win a 3v1 against an adequately matched killer, than the game should NEVER motivate any one survivor to do anything but help their team.
-
@EvieSimpsForCrowLady said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3185438#Comment_3185438
their best addons are toy sword and fingernail
Once you play against a Silencing Cloth Twins on Lery's running Plaything, Hysteria, Knock-Out, and Undying... you'll change your mind.
Disgusting build--it puts Scratch Mirror Myers to shame.
-
@EvieSimpsForCrowLady said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3185402#Comment_3185402
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3185403#Comment_3185403
his iri vial is literally his best addon lol
And Twins best add-on is Silencing Cloth.
I assumed we're looking past the Iris, no?
-
I think the same for Wesker, honestly. He has decent add-ons across the board, but his browns offer a bigger skill ceiling
-
While anti-chase anything is extremely frustrating to face as survivor, as it leaves them feeling like everything is a lose-lose...
I would agree with the sentiment that chase builds are the weakest of any build type a killer could run.
-
@YOURFRIEND said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3185022#Comment_3185022
Because they can't make the Dwight come and unhook you? Do you want them to come to his house and mash his face against the keyboard until he's broken and sobbing and comes and does a pointless hook trade? Like they're not responsible for an individual player's actions cuz people are people. They're going to do what they want.
@HectorBrando said:
4 gens left and 2 alive? Yeah I wouldnt unhook as Dwight and I wouldnt struggle on hook as you either, its over the Killer won, no reason to keep slowing the inevitable.
@RatbasterdJr said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3185022#Comment_3185022
It’s an asymmetrical game in which you may play however you like within certain parameters. There’s a lots of perks for being a “solo” survivor. While it may be frustrating, there’s nothing wrong with what Dwight did.
@pseudechis said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3184989#Comment_3184989
You can't really hate on it either.
I mean sometimes people are gonna play selfish, it emulates realism, not everyone is gonna risk it to save you.
The variable nature of the game is what keeps it interesting. Sometimes its a clean sweep, sometimes its a lost cause and sometimes its hard fought.
Like a real survival horror film, someone's not always going to stick their neck out for a stranger, in a SWF with their friends they'd probably try but with a bunch of strangers hmm maybe not.
Not every survivor is going to be generic hero guy all the time.
"Regardless of whether or not that was the smartest play for Dwight, my issue here is with the game, and the fact this scenario is possible." Oof that's some dangerous thinking there, akin to "we have to force everyone to play the same all the time!"
Nothing wrong with thinking "Dwight you selfish cowardly jerk!" but to say "Dwight should be forced to try and save me!" well frankly... 🤢🤮 on that notion.
Guys, I understand the Dwight's line of thinking.
Dude is equipped to save his own hide--I see why this was a no-brainer for him. It's not what I would do 99.9% percent of the time, but I get it.
That said...
This post ain't about whether or not Dwight made the right play.
This post is about the impact Dwight's decision had on other players' experience, and the fact that his decision was well rewarded, despite the negative impact it had on others.
@pseudechis I'm not here to dictate how people should be playing the game. Dwight should be able to maintain his agency. If he wants to leave my ass on hook, so be it. My quarrel is with this gameplay being rewarded.
As @TragicSolitude noted, BHVR is trying to have their cake and eat it to. This "we're teammates, but oh... I'm going to abandon you at the moment its most convenient for me," gameplay is problematic for the game's health. The whole game becomes a giant prisoner's dilemma, unless the killer is extremely incompetent.
-
@YOURFRIEND said:
I'm sorry you had a bad match and decided to blame the game developers for some bizzare reason
Thanks for your sympathy.
They made the game. How are they not at fault?
-
@RatbasterdJr said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3184989#Comment_3184989
No.. the game was over because y’all allowed somebody to die with 4 gens left, with 2 more of y’all on death hook. Y’all all failed. Dwight played for the win at that point, which he did.
Ada was on first hook when Dwight gave up. As far as I know, he gave up before she was hooked--she just had Kindred to show me where he was and what he wasn't doing the moment she was thrown on hook. He was the only one on death hook, and that doesn't justify his behavior.
This game should stop rewarding players who throw their teammates to the wolves. DBD is a 4v1--not a 1v1v1v1v1.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
I mean, why should the Dwight Unhook you? The game is lost.
Dwight was up there for the minute and a half Ada was on hook, forcing me to trade with her.
You can't seriously make excuses for this kind of gameplay.
The "game was over" because Dwight abstained from progressing the objective for 4 minutes.
---
Regardless of whether or not that was the smartest play for Dwight, my issue here is with the game, and the fact this scenario is possible.
-
If you don't already play on PC, but you're interested in doing it just for PTB, you will want to play on PC until you accumulate 2mil BP.
Unfortunately, and somewhat illogically, BHVR does not hand out bloodpoints for the PTB--you have to unlock everything as if it was the regular game. The new content will already be unlocked for you, but new killers and survivors will be Level 1.
The PTB takes a save file from some earlier point (I think like 2 weeks before the PTB), and uses that in the PTB.
-
A) What are your graphic settings? I love how vibrant these screenshots are--my game is so dull by comparison.
B) Hag is my least favorite killer to face--primarily because her counterplay is "slow is safe"
On paper, Hag really isn't that difficult to play against. She has a lot of things going for her, with area control, but her counter is pretty easy if survivors are methodical and deliberate about their actions. They can always default to resetting far from the Hag's web, but it turns her matches into a game of attrition, somewhat like the Plague.
It's not very fun to play against, especially because she doesn't chase--and that is where the thrill of DBD comes for experienced players.
C) I'm surprised you ran Franklin's, considering they only had 2 beemers and no medkits. I assume BNP on toolboxes, which would instantly rule out Franklin's value on half the survivors. The beemers are obviously a detriment to your kit, but I wouldn't have assumed 2 green batteries and filaments--looks like it was a good call for you in the end.
-
@TheSubstitute said:
Unpopular opinion; Killer is not as frustrating and unplayable overall as people say it is and neither is solo survivor.
Those games that ARE frustrating tho...
WOOF.
This game knows how to kill a good time real quick.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3183458#Comment_3183458
Bug reporting, yes. Finding specific forum threads, yes (you're actually going to have easier luck typing "kill slugs dbd forums" into a search engine than you are here). Case and point:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/AIKUF9GU4NTZ/img-20220911-202601.jpg
But patch notes?
As I proved in a different thread, it takes a 30 second Google search with maximum 5 clicks. Alternatively, they link the full patch notes in-game to easily read. There's literally no excuse for that because it says very clearly "Click here to read the full list of changes" in the news tab that automatically opens itself on every new update.
Maybe I subconsciously auto-close the news tab every time I log-in to it, but I’ve never actually noticed that I can find the patch notes in-game (been playing since 3rd anno.)
Regardless, I don’t really disagree with you. People should do a little bit of digging themselves.
I’m just amused by the round-about ways I’ve needed to find things pertaining to this game.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3183424#Comment_3183424
As discovered by me in a previous thread no people don't actually read the patch notes and then get confused about new additions and get annoyed when they're told to read the patch notes
Lol, it doesn’t really help that the forum search bar is virtually useless.
If I can’t remember the name of this thread, and I go looking for it under “kill slugs,” it will be 3rd in the search, after a 2020 and 2021 thread.
Edit: I thought I was in another thread. lol. Point still stands, just not pertaining to this specific thread.
2nd Edit: If I search ‘bots,’ this comes up 5th
It makes the “find it yourself” method unnecessarily tedious—especially with respect to bug reporting.
I read the patch notes as soon as I’m able, the day they are released. But for the longest time I’d need to use Google just to locate them, because finding the link to them on here is like an intermediate escape room puzzle.
-
The slug be like…
then Unbreakable in your face, and tbag your body when the killer downs you.
-
@Viciusaurus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3183091#Comment_3183091
I never thought I'd see the day where TiNH is in a build.
hahah, just until I learn how to consistently hit the Hyperfocus skill checks!
I like the mini-game Hyperfocus creates. Stakeout is no doubt the more optimal choice, but it removes the challenge I’m looking for.
-
Hyperfocus, Resilience, This is Not Happening, and Repressed Alliance.….because I’m tired of killers “outplaying” me by kicking my gen with Overcharge, Eruption, and Call of Brine then leaving my injured ass after pushing me across the map, because they know they can down my healthy teammates faster.
-
I agree with @drakolyr on this one.
’gg’ is a pretty hollow comment now.
It feels pretty negligent to say ‘gg’ after stomping your opponent. It needn’t be intentionally spiteful—it just conveys that you don’t understand how painful that game was for your opponent.
After a stomp, I usually say “tough game,” and then refer to the incident that really contributed to it being rough.
Sometimes being able to talk about why that last match was so brutal is cathartic, so I try to open the door for that discussion from time to time.
-
@Krazzik said:
And DOOM and GTA cause school shootings right? Geez I thought this thought process was proven wrong decades ago.
Mate, that isn’t the point OP was trying to make.
This thread is just a half-rant about how OP encountered [presumably more than one] killer whose course of actions facilitated the least enjoyable experience for their opponents.
There is no presumption of innocence here, as the course of actions taken by the killer would be found neither necessary nor efficient to a reasonable person.
While one can construct a scenario in which the game might lead them to play maliciously (as @Chaos999 has so kindly done), OP is calling out those who use the game with ill-intent.
So while it might be a stretch to claim that shooting games make someone want to shoot people IRL, it is not a stretch to say that someone who wants to exert dominance over another person IRL would turn to a game that provides them the opportunity to do so.
Edit: To touch upon an extreme example… If you’ve seen Netflix’s Don’t F*ck With Cats, that guy would enjoy playing DBD for the reasons OP bemoans.
2nd Edit: TL;DR OP’s point is that some people are really scummy, and it is frustrating that DBD is their outlet for being scummy.
-
@gatsby said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3182153#Comment_3182153
The Devs have stated that the way you die and the way you escape matter.
(i.e. if you’re the first death vs fourth death you lose less or if you escape through hatch, which isn’t considered an escape rather a draw)
If you really have a 60% exit gate escape rate as Survivor in solo queue, you’re probably a hacker and shouldn’t be bragging so hard
lmfao, is 60% really that hard to believe?
i’ll link you to all 50 endgame screenshots when I get back to my computer on Tuesday.
I might be escaping more than I’m dying, but I’m still having a miserable time playing survivor. It feels like I’m babysitting my teammates, and the games I lose are absolute stomps.
i’ve got nothing good to say about solo queue atm, despite how green the grass may appear on my side
-
How do people refuse to believe there is something deeper behind this behavior?
A mild-mannered, considerate individual does not deliberately subject another person to the worst possible experience they could have in any given scenario.
I don’t know the full context of the situation (maybe both slugs were in a hook deadzone), but a killer doesn’t decide to bleed out survivors “just because.”
-
@gatsby said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3181980#Comment_3181980
You actually just proved my point.
Even a 60% winrate doesn’t feel like high MMR because ongoing the Killer queue situation means that the matchmaking for Killers is barely on at all.
Correlation does not mean causation.
Only thing that can be proved here is that you’re not in “very high MMR.”
We cannot even prove that I am in high MMR. For all we know, I was in elo hell before those 50 games.
-
I feel terrible when my teammate hides while I take the killer on a 5+ minute chase in a 2v1, with 1-2 gens left.
If someone wants to reward me for playing well, and requires my cooperation to find the last survivor, I’ll happily get up to use the bathroom while my virtual body is taken for an Uber ride.
It is against the rules to work with the killer. And last I checked… out of the 2 other players remaining in the lobby, the Claudette is looking a whole lot more like a killer than the Clown.
-
@OrangeBear said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3182052#Comment_3182052
Are you serious? Lethal Pursuer = The killer is going to play dirty? You're ridiculous.
You’ve really never played against a killer who finds the survivor in the first 15s of the game, downs them almost instantly, and still camps/tunnels?
Lethal is a fantastic perk for camping killers, because it allows them to apply pressure before the survivors can “just do gens.”
-
@OrangeBear said:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/YH6G2ZDL09CL/image.png
Lol, first match after reading this two team mates that bring flans give up for no reason. Maybe because it was pinhead but like... there are far worse killers.
L.
If I was found first this game, and I assumed he used Lethal, I’d immediately conclude the killer was intending to play incredibly dirty.
Sloppy and Bamboozle on Pinhead with a Mori just screams “I’m never traveling further than 32m from he hook.”
If the killer did walk away, I’d conclude he stood exactly 33m away, waiting for unhook, once Make Your Choice reveals itself.
Can’t deny the fact that some builds on certain killers, paired with certain offerings, will trigger me before I even see how the killer plays.
-
I’m sorry, but it is mathematically impossible for you to be “very high MMR” while maintaining a 40-50% escape rate.
Your MMR is only going one direction—down.
I recorded 50 solo games before patch 6.1.0, and I had a 60%+ escape rate. It definitely didn’t feel like I was in high MMR.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3180460#Comment_3180460
The people who stand against you aren't the ones you need to convince, it's the developers themselves. Look at the Bubba situation- people still disagree with that, and they always will, but it was resolved because the developers were convinced.
@FallenAither said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3180460#Comment_3180460
I don't think you need to fight to convince the opposition to agree with you. In this situation it's not the people who disagree who are the ones who can make the change, it's the devs. Trying to convince others to agree is just wasting energy and putting it to the wrong place because I doubt a few comments on a forum is going to make someone change their opinion.
The devs will always do what they believe to be in their best interest.
In your example @GoodBoyKaru, they could look at the greater socio-political climate to draw conclusions about what the “majority” of their players would like to see done about the situation.
They don’t have that same driving force here for accessibility. Even in developed countries, accessibility is almost always an after-thought.
It’s sad to say, but what @kizuati is asking for here is really trailblazing in the game industry.
So if we want to make it happen, we need numbers to prove to BHVR that it is a high priority problem
-
Do you honestly expect everyone to fall in line, when you make a call-to-action about a problem that has persisted in gaming for decades now?
If you want to make change, then it is on you to see that happen. You can’t stand for something and then hope everyone will stand next to you.
Sure, your friends will stand with you, and the people who already agree with you will stand with you. But the people who should matter most to you are the ones who disagree with you—they are what stand between you and the change you wish to see in the world.
Convince the people who stand against you why they should stand alongside you, and you can make change.
If you’re not able and/or willing to do that, then you’ll never see the world you want to live in.
-
@kizuati said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3180326#Comment_3180326
"My problem is the sheer entitlement. Accessibility features are great, but acting like you deserve them just for existing"
God I just noticed how big of a dogwhistle your post is. Tons of homophobes and transphobes use this exact rhetoric of "I don't hate x,I just don't like how entitled they're acting", telling queer people how they should advocate for their rights.
If you're not affected by these issues,but feel like you're entitled to the right to complain about how we advocate for accessibility - you're not. You're just entitled because you're in a position of privilege. Go away.
Can you please change your tone?
I understand you feel strongly about this topic—may even be personally effected by it—but Ben’s comments have been devoid of emotional bias.
You’re attacking his character when you should be bringing constructive criticism to the table.
You can’t “win” an argument against a rational thinker by challenging their ethos.
You’re villainizing yourself by demonizing him, even if he appears apathetic to your problems.
I don’t have enough knowledge about photosensitivity to have a dog in this fight, but as a third party reading this conversation, it feels like you’re Sandra Bullock and this is the Blind Side.
-
I wish people would educate themselves before establishing strong feelings & opinions about a particular topic…
-
Everything that is in your control measures your skill. Everything that is out of your control measures the game’s design.
In order to identify game issues, you must also be able to identify the limits of player control.
-
@Raccoon said:
I really hate when I see a comment posted, click to read it, and it is no longer available/removed.
I always wonder about the 'winning' comments I'm missing out on:(
The other day I opened a forum thread in a new tab, while I was doing other things on my computer.
About 15min after I opened the thread I decided to read it. Figured I should refresh first, and before I even read any of the content my page reloaded to “this post has been removed.”
…I was really kicking myself for missing out on some drama
-
@IronKnight55 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3174818#Comment_3174818
What if he didn't leave? My guess is that he stayed near the hooks waiting for someone to come along. I could be wrong though.
As would be the proper strat for Nemi in this situation. If you got two survivors on two close hooks, I don't see why you'd leave lol
Theres no such thing as a "safe unhook" in this situation unless the killer is the nicest chap you've ever met.
-
Some of these comments really got me sideways...
People truly believe Otz is constantly complaining about something? The man's content output is like 70% DBD Educational, 20% HAHA Funny DBD, and 10% "Here are my thoughts on this..."
I think the problem here is pretty clear; a significant population of players only dip their feet in one role, and they are all reluctant to admit when the tools at their disposal break the game and/or make the game insufferable to the other side. Nothing but a bunch of scavengers walking 'round these parts rendering feedback virtually useless to the devs, because it pales in comparison to the reliability of their data.
How does anyone expect this game to improve when y'all acting like seagulls?
https://media.giphy.com/media/DB2oahQFa0qeQ/giphy.gif -
In my experience... survivors don't usually taunt out the gate unless they a) have a lot of experience in the game, and want to rub it in your face, or b) they're high af or several beers deep and goofing around.
After the first pallet drop, you'll typically be able to tell which category they fall under.
If the survivor is good, take advantage of the fact they are showing you their hand, and go chase someone else--wait until the arrogant survivor is out of position to strike them down.
If the survivor is clearly inebriated, take the BM with a grain of salt and enjoy the fact that you probably have an easy game ahead of you.
-
@Nihlus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3171907#Comment_3171907
The source is how bad the game is designed. Imbalance was the name of the game and always will be. Trying to play this game without copius amounts of alcohol is an exercise in frustration. Solo survivor is a masochism simulator. The game feels like digital self-harm more often than not. The only time it's fun is when you have 5 people playing custom. No more sweaty people. No more ridiculously imbalanced crap. Just messing around.
This community makes League of Legends' feel like rainbows and sunshine. I can't wait for the bots to come out. I'll never touch anything but custom games again.
Right, but what happens if the devs manage to balance the game? Will it still be a party game?
The term eludes me, because I don't think a lack of balance is sufficient enough to make it a party game--it just means the game isn't balanced.
Party games have heavy amounts of RNG, comeback mechanics, and/or social interaction. For example, Super Smash Bros is a party game with all the RNG item spawns, but competitive when played without. Mario Kart is a party game when racing against others because of the RNG item boxes, but competitive when doing time trials.
If the game is balanced, skill will be too large a determining factor in the outcome of a trial to continue calling DBD a party game. Sure, it is sandboxy enough to play around, but the game is not inherently a 'party game.'
