Laluzi
Laluzi
About
- Username
- Laluzi
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,175
- Last Active
Comments
-
@MeanieDeeny said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3222597#Comment_3222597
I’ve 100% purchased hundreds of dollars in cosmetics. So doubt no more.
You, I, and anyone posting on these forums aren't 'most players.' By dint of being here, we're in a subset that is more invested than the average user.
I don't doubt anyone's spent hundreds in cosmetics, I doubt that the players who have make up a significant portion of the playerbase.
-
Killer... undeniably is the power role, though. They're the 1 in a 1v4. That's what power role means. The killer is the most powerful individual player in a match and has large advantages meant to balance out the survivors' strength in numbers.
-
I rather doubt that most players have put hundreds of dollars into the game, much less on cosmetics, but I very much would like to hear BHVR's reasoning for this.
-
Wraith is very good at fast map traversal, starting chases from close range, and countering W, but he has no tools to loop with at all.
When he's cloaked, run to a window attached to a wall long enough that he can't sit on the end and lunge from either side. He now has to uncloak in order to do anything to you, because the window blocker will never activate as long as he's cloaked. Failing that, camp a pallet and whack him when he lunges. This is incredibly easy to do and the Wraith can't avoid it, but you don't want to waste too many pallets doing this.
When he's uncloaked, treat him like any other M1 killer and loop away. If he cloaks again, you want to place yourself in a position where he can't hit you coming out of it. Windows are your best friend.
Avoid staying injured unless you're in a strong structure. And when on a gen or healing, constantly rotate your camera so that you catch his shimmer before he's right on top of you. Be aware of potential bell addons (normal, mapwide, silent) and act accordingly when observed; be very attentive of nearby LOS blockers if he has a clapper. Also avoid generators that are in complete dead zones unless you're healthy and confident.
As for hearing him, I use a $10 pair of Walgreens earbuds plugged into my laptop and I can hear Wraith's sound cues just fine. Anything will work and I strongly recommend it over diffuse sound - hearing proper directional audio improves performance drastically, especially as killer.
-
Don't worry, that just means you have to stop when you hit 696,969 instead.
-
This doesn't seem like it would actually fix much. If the killer is camping, it doesn't matter how long your Endurance last; they can hit you straight off hook and it's gone. Now what?
Also, giving Endurance to the unhooker just lets survivors force no-win situations by looping or hiding near the hook and moving to unhook once they can be guaranteed it'll make them invincible.
-
@Friendly_Blendette said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3222412#Comment_3222412
I really liked the whole Blight largely being unaware of the causes of experiments or trying his best to remain unaware of it then slowly becoming more obsessed and eventually descending into madness it really better paints how he could end up in the entity's realm as a survivor first. But now it just feels like he was a killer through and through and was originally a survivor for shits and giggle cause it might be fun to have a former survivor as a killer.
Same. The idea of how a survivor could be driven into becoming a killer was fascinating, but the Rift treated him like any other killer. I'm putting him up there with Nurse, Legion, and Hag with killers whose original vision got totally distorted (mainly because Hag's story doesn't even make any sense with the Rift stuff she got.)
The result of all this conflicting character vision feels super messy and unintentional. Can't they keep some good summaries at BHVR HQ? Keep the same writers on the same characters? I'm sick of the 'well, it could be a different version of ___' handwaving the way nothing has any internal consistency anymore.
Re:Doc, with lazy, I meant that the new version is just so uninspired. It feels low-effort, like someone scrawled it down in five minutes to get the job over with. It doesn't make you envision anything, or recoil from anything, or do anything more than the bare minimum of telling you that Herman Carter is a mean doctor who did electroshock research for the FBI. The old one was evocative. It painted his growing reputation and disconnect from ethics, the way prisoners shipped off to be disappeared begged to be sent to anyone but him, the way the halls would ring with screams... it described the graphic remains of his final actions on this plane before the Fog swallowed him up. It was good writing. This is not.
-
@Friendly_Blendette said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3222049#Comment_3222049
Oh my dear lord. I never even realised they changed his lore. At least the core lore itself is intact because it is one of the more intresting ones but holy ######### I never realised they dumbed down the actual writing in it so much. Just what was the purpose of this.
I never knew this either. What the hell was the purpose of this? The style of lore has been becoming longer, not shorter, and the information in there is so much less interesting now. This is an M-rated horror game; there is zero reason to throw a conniption over gore.
I wonder if something in there fell afoul of some country's laws. But seriously, big L. Doc had a fantastic backstory that very thoroughly painted the kind of detached monster he was, and the new version is just... lazy.
-
@Slowpeach said:
I think with Susie she has a lot of dark thoughts but doesn’t act upon them. When push comes to shove she’s the timid girl who doesn’t want to kill. Granted I’m having trouble finding the cosmetic in question but a lot of Susies cosmetics imply a lot but implication doesn’t mean action.
I mean Julies tome as it stands has several contradictions with Frank’s lore and things such as the mural that Jeff did. I mean different universe magic maybe and simply remembering things differently but yeah.
The cosmetic is her lunar new year knife, though her midnight artist set and the cheerleader set from one of the recent rifts both have some "Susie was very violent in her school days" information or at least implications. The new year knife definitively has her stabbing a random dude.
Also, yeah, Julie's tome clashes with Frank's lore and makes her sound like the main instigator in the Legion. Personally I liked them as a group of troubled kids who started out screwing around with lowkey vandalism and egged themselves on way too far, not a bunch of irredeemably messed up anarchists who united in their mutual desire to watch Ormond burn.
-
The lore in this game is so incredibly inconsistent. It started with the Archives. Susie's one of the best examples, because she's simultaneously the reluctant shy girl who got peer pressured into joining a murder and also the Legion's biggest psycho who was stabbing shopkeepers and her fellow cheerleaders and making midnight art with the blood. But the Nurse is also both an angel of mercy who wanted to end the endless suffering she saw and a eugenicist who loathed her patients and wanted to cleanse the impure, and the Hag seems to simultaneously have lived in pre-1900s backwoods country and post-1950s modern suburbia? The Blight showed remorse for his actions in his initial lore and his atrocities were framed as something he'd just turned a blind eye to and never really knew the depths of, but the archives painted him as being extremely amoral and willing to commit murder out of pure convenience well before his life turnaround or his descent into madness in the Realm. And the Plague was beloved by her people for her tireless efforts to save them in her lore blurb, but her cosmetics talk about her being hella merciless and brutal.
It's so dissonant. Who are these characters supposed to be? Whatever we want them to be?
And Yun-Jin's lore didn't outright change as much as some of these guys, but her framing went from understandable denial to 'she totally knew about Ji-Woon and didn't want to ruin her image.'
They like to handwave this off as alternate universes, but I really hate that excuse because it turns anything they tell us about the killers into meaningless words.
-
Bully squads are really frustrating because I almost always go into this game with chill vibes - I'm not throwing the game or anything, but fun is my first and foremost goal and winning is secondary. So when I encounter people whose goal is also not winning but instead anti-fun, making their opponents as miserable as possible, it's something of a moral clash - they're the exact opposite of what I'm here for and I resent them for being like that because I can't even begin to understand taking pleasure in that behavior. Beating them isn't fun in the way I like to have fun, it's more angry vindication and revenge porn, and that's again not what I want out of a video game.
Bully squads are going to get way worse with the new mori system unless BHVR makes significant changes, too. Best advice I can give is to dodge lobbies with four flashlights or close the game with alt-tab or task manager if they all last second switch, as those are usually signals that the survivors are going to be extremely annoying people.
(I should note that stuff like looping and spinning isn't inherently bully stuff, though, that's just strong play. Bullying can involve that, but it's more tbagging/clicking, cheese plays like Flip Flop/Boil Over + map offerings or double lockers + flashlights, and very aggressive flashlight/sabo/bodyblock saving. Taunting is a staple and it's not bullying without it.)
-
Plaything/Penti is fine. At least one person knows where the totem is in both cases, and you can choose to counter Pentimento by just ignoring Plaything. The only time ignoring Plaything isn't a viable choice is on indoor maps.
I would way rather verse Plaything/Pentimento as my killer's slowdown than Eruption/CoB/Overcharge.
-
@Dead_Harder said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3221908#Comment_3221908
Also im convinced flying can be implemented in game as demonstrated by .... cheaters lol
You can absolutely implement flying. It'll just be unbalanced as hell and be overpowered or worthless depending on the map.
@Dead_Harder said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3221908#Comment_3221908
You mean a great killer?
Yep, sure. The endless seething controversy since her release is totally an indication of fantastic design.
-
@Johnny_XMan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3221215#Comment_3221215
You don't have to question it, it's not like I am out here trying to change your mind. I am simply not in agreement, and especially when people like the comment I responded to bring Mental Health into the mix. At this point they are reaching and as I already explained the game is riddled with anxiety inducing issues. I question the legitimacy of that kind of concern when if we start to decipher the game and it's content as a whole.
Why do you care about what my horse is doing in this race, when you're not bothering to put yours before your cart? As you yourself aren't even sure what the "Available for a limited time only" really means (based on your previous comments), yet proceed to lash against it as if you did.
I'll eat my words if I'm wrong, but right now all the puzzle pieces are leading to a very worrying picture. BHVR's potential reasons to want to do this, recent shop decisions, recent and increasingly specific survey topics - these are not shedding an innocent light on what's coming next, especially if we extrapolate from the last survey that BHVR wants to do this on every holiday and event. Or do we believe that BHVR just axed its cosmetic revenue out of sheer confidence and the goodness of their hearts?
At best, this is unnecessarily gating content and making things less accessible to newbies, players on breaks, and players with bad financial situations. At worst, it's a highly manipulative marketing tactic meant to induce panic buying.
You don't really seem to have any reason for this other than "you're all screaming at nothing, shut up", which... okay, if you want to go around stirring the pot, that's your prerogative.
@FancyMrB said:
Some skins being limited time only is not the end of the world. If they did this for everything, yes it would be an issue and big turn off, but for now that doesn't seem like the case. Plus for all we know the Halloween skins are limited for Halloween season. They could be back next year, and at a discounted price to make way for newer cosmetics.
If they bring in FOMO, it's not going to be Halloween only. Might start that way, but it becomes constant, because there's no reason for them not to do it when it makes more short-term money. Again, the last survey gave a big checklist of events and said "when do you want your limited cosmetic sets?" I genuinely cannot envision them taking anything other than 'all of them' as an answer, because... why wouldn't they? They already release cosmetics for all of them.
I'm also not convinced that cosmetics being in the same set means anything, because most Amazon Prime exclusives were pulled from sets - everlasting frost Blight, Valentines Dwight, Lunar New Year Jake, spring Meg, insect Jeff. There are other outfits that belong to sets that are primarily shop-based but ended up in the Rift - see Greek Ace and Mikaela, or waterfront Feng and Kate.
@bm33 said:
At this point since many have voiced concerns/disappointment/frustration/etc. with Dwight and Jane being listed as "time limited in store from Oct 11 - Nov 3" someone from BHVR could've come in by now to ease players worries by clarifying what exactly they mean. Like if these will be available for shards and be back next year then say something like "no worries players, we aren't trying to get around our recent announcement that original cosmetics will be available for shards after 4 weeks in store by having these cosmetics only available for 3 weeks then pulling them from the store - these will be available for shards because we want a happy event. Also these cosmetics will be back in the store next year for players that missed out because FOMO feels bad." Buuut BHVR has been silent and that's generally not a great sign from them.
This. While it's possible the mods never asked for clarification or haven't gotten an answer yet, the fact that nobody's corrected what would otherwise be mass fearmongering kinda implies that the answer isn't one that would pacify the masses.
Believe me, I'd be overjoyed to be wrong about all of this.
-
@Marigoria said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3221892#Comment_3221892
Really would tho. Most of the hackers I’ve came across are from Epic, and we all know how they’re able to have so many accounts even after getting plenty of them banned.
Just the other week a Epic Games hacker was streaming and was already banned 9 times JUST during that stream.
@kizuati said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3221895#Comment_3221895
Exactly. It's INFINITELY cheaper to cheat right now SOLELY due to EGS.
I think what people are forgetting is that we were having a big cheating surge before Epic Games Store, and that was a big part of why everyone was going "oh god no stop" when they announced the EGS promotion.
Personally, all but one of the cheaters I've seen were on Steam. Banning EGS isn't a solution because there's plenty of ordinary users on that platform who don't deserve to get the axe.
-
The longer the game goes on, the fewer original ideas there are to plumb. You notice how every killer released since Twins has some kind of unique status effect they inflict on the survivor? It's because mechanically, they're running out of different ways the killer can go about hitting you. There was plenty of new ground to tread back in 2017 and 2018, but now, most killers are going to end up feeling similar to already existing killers just because there's only so many things you can do within the game's limitations.
Like... flying, wall crawling, destroying environmental objects, turning survivors into killer minions - they're all cool ideas for killers, but they don't work with DBD's structure. Nurse is a fantastic example of what happens when you ignore game design and work outside the limits.
-
AFK crows spawn if you remain in the same tile for long enough without interacting with anything.
Personally I think it should take killer proximity into account, but yeah, if you're pacing back and forth in the same small area, you'll still get crows.
-
I mean, ######### homophobes and salt the ######### earth after the banhammer of justice comes down on their hateful asses, but that's not a platform issue, that's a player issue.
The endless burner accounts from that hilariously misconstrued free release are a platform issue.
-
I think you raise an interesting point about how they did her teaser lore with various different versions of Haddie. Personally, I think that's an aspect of the lore that's been mishandled. I think the only time I really thought it was done well was with Terra Arachna, where you saw a clearly different version of Falls City and characters from Nea's tome in a survival horror story. Otherwise, it just... disconnects things, I guess, to throw out a bunch of conflicting lore and then say "this all did and didn't happen at the same time" or "the backstory we just gave you is of an ~alternate version~ of your character." It gives any particular story way less impact and mostly comes out looking confused.
Also, yes, Haddie desperately needs cosmetics. I know for a fact that there's a black version of her Prime outfit that's seemingly vanished into the ether, and it was meant to release with her alongside that Prime outfit. Her Masquerade outfit is great, but that was a blink-and-you'll-miss-it release.
While people are correct that the more survivors exist, the fewer people will want to main a new one unless they're from a beloved licensed property, Mikaela Reid is a perfect example of how good perks and good cosmetics can attract a significant fanbase.
-
No? My BP has increased in value. I can buy more with it. It's great.
-
@Gylfie said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3220216#Comment_3220216
This whole post was so incredibly well phrased that I did not only upvote but also felt the need to tell you that in a comment.
Aw, thank you. ❤️
@Nicholas said:
Is this forever exclusive, or is it like the Rift cosmetics labeled as "exclusives" and then sold? Is it that little banner that people are worried means forever? Thanks
We don't know for sure. Most of the concern isn't just from the limited banner; some people who follow the player satisfaction surveys have been concerned about FOMO for a few months now, because it keeps cropping up there with more and more definite terms, and people have taken this as the flag that they're finally debuting it. I'm... pretty sure that the shop outfits going away permanently was mentioned in one of the surveys? The second last one.
@Johnny_XMan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3221046#Comment_3221046
I’m only giving you one example. Also, going back to the “turning off chat” we could say the same and suggest that those people you talk about just not play the game. Why would anyone with bad anxiety want to play an anxiety ridden game?
You are trying to squeeze every bit of an excuse into something that really isn’t that impactful, when you think about the rest of the things the game has which could also jeopardize one’s mental health. Not to mention the fact that the Battlepass is already doing this.
I really question why you're so ardent to defend this decision. You've been white knighting it on most the recent threads about FOMO, but I haven't actually seen you give a reason for why this is a good thing, and when told why it's a bad thing, you deflect and pull whataboutism or you just belittle the given reasons (as if this isn't one of the most virulent and disliked tactics in webgame marketing.) What's your horse in this race? If most people don't want it, why do you think BHVR should do it? And no, "you shouldn't care about this because it's not a big deal" isn't a reason to do it.
I should add that the battlepass isn't (or wasn't) FOMO because battlepass content didn't contain true exclusives. Everything came to the shop eventually - except charms, but nobody cares about charms, so that barely mattered. But the battlepass is also not nearly as cashgrabby as this upcoming FOMO system because it wants you to play the game more than it wants you to shovel money into a furnace. The battlepass on DBD pays itself back, so you only ever need to buy the premium track once. Constant retiring cosmetics wants you to hemorrhage your wallet with every fresh release.
-
Only one of the OG survivors has home turf, and many killers don't, either. Off the top of my head: Ghostface, Bubba, Blight, Twins, Trickster, Pinhead, Onryo, and Demo (RIP) don't have associated maps. Of the survivors, only Laurie, Quentin, Jeff, Cheryl, Jill, Leon, Ada, Rebecca, and maybe Jonah and Haddie have maps that have anything to do with them at all.
I wouldn't have an issue with this feature, but if it provides a significant buff, then it becomes kinda unfair that some characters are excluded from it immediately. Other times it gets a bit awkward because your home map might be really good or really bad, and you're better or worse off because of that. Deathslinger, Oni, and Billy are happy to play on their home turf; Freddy, Hag, and Pig aren't.
-
People want to have their fun with moris before BHVR takes it all away. Been seeing more Devour Hope, too.
Also, yeah, the new Mori offerings are horrible. They're worse than puddings in terms of their reward, wholly dependent on how tough the opposition is, and are completely countered by hatch, which you can't control without slugging for the 4k.
-
It's an ultra-rare because Huntress only had one ultra-rare when they did the addon pass, she needed another, and of all the new addons they made for her, that was the best one. Which isn't saying much, but it's going up against the likes of Wooden Fox and Rose Root...
Personally, I would have liked an Ultra-Rare that silenced her lullaby and gave her a 32m TR instead.
-
Tied between Ghostface (F in chat for Carl) and the first Resident Evil trailer. Meg getting yeeted into a car was one of the greatest things ever put on screen.
-
I love this idea! I'd totally use it. I think being able to give bloodpoints would be nice as well. Different players may not care about their stocks of one of these things and want to give them out, while wanting to maintain the other.
As others have said, I'd like if the thumbs up button did something positive for that player, on the caveat that you can't thumbs up people you queued with. Getting thumbs ups could reward small amounts of bloodpoints or shards, or getting very large amounts of thumbs ups could unlock charms or cosmetics. Possibly there could even be unique rewards for getting rated up as both survivor and killer so that survivors don't inherently have an advantage to in-game like collection.
-
Most survivors don't have access to sabotage? You need a perk or a toolbox that hasn't already been used on a generator, which is primarily how they're spent. I rarely encounter issues with my scourge hooks getting saboed.
-
@ProfessorDunwich said:
Given how low effort the Plague's is, I don't see why they wouldn't.
Low effort? They turned her censor into a gumball machine. The only way they could possibly improve upon this is if they changed her vomit into a stream of skittles.
-
@aliensuperrstar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3221043#Comment_3221043
there is an easy solution. Give those who can’t play what they PAID FOR enough cells to buy a chapter and enough blood points to compensate for how much they leveled up.
Sounds fair to me. BHVR needs to improve their cross-progression system in general.
-
Crouching towards a Pig and pointing, while amusing, is usually a pretty good way to give away a hook state for free. I prefer to boop when the Pig invites me by crouching up to me and oinking - though it's led to some weird situations where the Pig was legitimately trying to ambush me and stuttered on the M2, and then the survivor they were chasing randomly stopped fleeing and started pointing at them.
-
While I agree it's pretty bad there's no longer support for physical copies and the only response given is a "sorry but you're outta luck", I wouldn't be so quick to berate BHVR for this. I would suspect this has more to do with the deals they made with Netflix when it came to closing the license and that they no longer legally have the ability to provide vouchers regardless of whether they want to or not.
That this all coincided with a time PS5s were barely available is... extremely unfortunate.
I will say that DBD's news filtration can sometimes be pretty bad in that it often requires players to pay attention to the game's social media (or have a social media presence at all) instead of releasing important information through the game itself. This probably should have been in the in-game news.
-
If anything, that might be a bad idea to try and do deliberately. Very laggy survivors are prone to suddenly warping away because your game is extrapolating their movement from outdated information, only to get a refresh and update to their actual position, which was in a totally different direction. They can be very hard to hit.
-
@AshInTheTallGrass said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3220414#Comment_3220414
Well said. Agreed.
(Though I do still enjoy facing Nurse)
Thank you!
I find Nurse is fun to verse when the Nurse is decent or just 'good', because that's when the difficulty level is most adjacent to other killers while allowing you to partake in Nurse's unique and sometimes wacky counterplay. It's pure prediction on both sides and I enjoy those last ditch "you don't know what I'm doing if I don't know what I'm doing" moments. But a really experienced Nurse usually mops the floor with you before you have the opportunity to do anything (bonus points if there's starstruck/if) and a baby Nurse just feels bad.
-
I'd say Huntress and no alch ring/c33 Blight are good examples. Both are very powerful and have high skill ceilings, but they have specific counterplay that's fun to engage. You can really play push-pull with them and there's room for skill expression on both sides. I'd say most A and B tier killers fall in this category, with some exceptions. Killers whose powers push them to camp, slug, or tunnel off hook tend not to be fun to verse because survivors spend so much time unengaged - though they do tend to be fun to play because they have chase-ending powers (again, with some exceptions - Hagatha and Charlotte, looking at you.)
Nurse isn't fun to verse because your ability to not fall over and die at any single point is totally reliant on the Nurse's headset and skill level. If the Nurse has mastered the killer, there is generally nothing you can do, especially with range/recharge addons. The same goes for an M1 killer against good survivors; until you eat half the pallets on the map, anything you can do is reliant on them screwing up, not on you playing well.
I think it boils down to a lack of options being unfun. Fun to play killers need have the ability to end chases quickly, but fun to play against killers need to be able to be dodged or stalled if the survivor plays well. Map dependency is another aspect - so many killers get destroyed simply because a map is too big or there's too many pallets, and gee effin' gee if you load Rotten Fields and find a Trickster waiting.
-
@ArthurVeloso said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3220370#Comment_3220370
When I say to nerf her, I mean to remove this possibility. She can harass a target, build condemn, and body block the TV if she knows that this one is the right one. If your teammates body block her, she may build STBL stacks, then use that in her favor to prevent you from inserting the tape.
Again, that was your team screwing up by engaging Sadako when they didn't have any reason to. Bodyblocking at that stage is pointless because as long as Sadako doesn't hit the person who needs to touch the TV, you're achieving less than nothing. I know you can't control what your team is doing unless you're in a SWF, but once your team starts making dumb plays that feed a killer, it stops being "this situation is OP" and starts being "my team got me killed." Which, if it's a situation where the killer only gets a 1k, isn't all that noteworthy.
My problem with the nerf is that while her Condemn mechanic generally sucks and doesn't do anything unless you really brute force it (or end up on 1 of like 3 possible maps that are small enough), the fact that survivors need to run to a specific TV does create pressure that would not exist if they could access any TV, or if they couldn't be required to go to a TV she is near. She can and does benefit from this at times she's playing perfectly normally.
There's all kinds of weird scummy strategies killers can use, but generally they don't become problems unless they're effective at killing and people start using them because it's an easy way to get results. AFK Pig was popular because you could literally AFK and get kills. All you had to do was move to a box at the start, and you could go, boil pasta, and come back to a 2K. This is more like Basement Bubba, where you spend a long time doing nothing at all and that's boring for everyone, but you still need to go and win chases in order to get kills. And this gimmick is way less effective than Basement Bubba at getting team wipes.
Actually, now that I think about it, Bubba is better at this strat in every single way. It's the exact same issue - you get downed once and you're out of the game. Except Bubba can do it to anyone whenever he feels like it, can quick-break pallets, can't be bodyblocked except when he's carrying, and has a readily available instadown. Sadako needs to use a rare addon, has to wait for most of the match before she's allowed to start chasing one specific person as a powerless M1 killer, and that person may be across the map and can give her the runaround and reach the TV while she heads over to a killer instinct prompt, in addition to the whole 'lol noclip' thing.
This strat isn't going to take off. It's way too weak.
-
@danielmaster87 said:
You've got 1 niche way of playing her, the only thing that works, because she sure as heck can't chase like normal and win, and you want to take that away?
It's not even that. The force condemn strat involves teleporting around wildly and doing mass hit and run with that one iri that turns TVs back on, IIRC. That or Ring Drawing, the start-out-with-a-tape purple, and slugging. This is just dollar store AFK Pig, if Jigsaw boxes took two seconds to search and didn't kill you on their own. You'd be lucky to get more than a 1k doing this.
-
@ArthurVeloso said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3220354#Comment_3220354
I disagree. You claim that this is a dumb strategy, and say that it doesn't take the counter possibility. But, what you don't mention is the fact that once Sadako knows it, it is basically over. You can force condemn Moris with that strategy, and there are many YouTube videos showing it. I personally saw this strategy taking place in a game this morning, I had to flashlight click and teabag the killer to avoid the mori. I had to body block with other two players to avoid a insta kill of a teammate that wasn't even hooked. Sadako misplayed to kill the guy, but she got 2 hooks as a reward of our body blocks. So, yeah, it is a pretty lame and unfair gameplay.
What do you mean, once Sadako knows it, it's over? You literally just walk through her. I haven't got the slightest idea what you mean about needing to click and tbag her, because a.) if the Sadako fell for it and left the box, she's dumb, and b.) again, why did you not walk into her. She has to hit you twice to down you. You lose collision on the first hit and have time to insert the tape. If she has more than one stack of STBFL, either you or your teammates have been screwing around and taking unnecessary hits. If she has 3 stacks of Devour, she hasn't been AFK all game. If she has Haunted Grounds, that was a team error. And if she has Rancor/NOED, you virtually already won the game while she loafed around doing nothing and just need to loop her M1 butt for 30 seconds while your teammates open a gate and come to escort you/do a bone. And if none of these things apply... that's all I can think of off the top of my head why you would not be able to literally ignore her and tank a hit.
I don't use these words much, but this is genuinely a skill issue. It's like getting grabbed by a killer at the hook because you full sent it the first time. You learn to spam grabs. Done. Issue solved. There is a clean solution to this and it always works as long as you don't faff around and give the killer power that they don't have by default. You cannot force a condemn mori by AFKing if the survivor knows what to do, unless their teammates were idiots. I suppose it's also a problem if you only try and go for the TV when you're at 7 and a half stacks of Condemned, and you haven't yet identified what Sadako is doing, but that is also a survivor screw-up because you shouldn't leave those kinds of status effects to the last minute.
It's bad gameplay, but it's easily taken apart. And yeah, bodyblocking is another way you can save your teammates once you recognize what she's up to, including escorting them to the TV. This is not an issue compared to some of the other strats (such as Sadako using her phase to make people unhookable, which I think is patched? But that was actually a problem, because you legitimately couldn't do anything.)
I wouldn't have an issue with changing how Sadako works, given that her entire power is gated by her terribly implemented mori system and I'd like them to change that, but the fact that you want a bottom five killer outright nerfed over a frankly pitiful and ineffective strat is just... no.
-
One thing with survivors is that only escaped survivors or the last one to die are likely to be in the chat (unless it's a SWF.) Ones who died earlier have probably already moved on, so they're often not around to say anything. Contrast to escaped survivors and the killer, who are always there for at least a second.
Anyway, I always say GG unless it was a pretty awful game, in which case I just leave.
-
@ArthurVeloso said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3220341#Comment_3220341
Lethal pursuer gets in clutch when it comes to guess what TV is the correct one. If a survivor spawn in one side of the map, it means that the other side has the right TV (plus you can see their aura walking straight to the TV). Also, you can just hit and run before they insert the tape, less experienced survivors will panic run and probably will expose the location of the TV. You can farm STBF stacks 1 or 2 while doing this if you focus on the non-obsession players. But the point is that it should never be a thing, like the Pig camping the box.
I disagree. It's a bad strat, but the point is that there is something that you can always do against it, and therefore it's the survivors' fault for failing to deconstruct it. It's like NOED - dumb or bold survivors will get themselves killed rushing in for the save without dealing with the bone, smart survivors will snap to their roles and locate it, or recognize when the only thing they can do is leave. Both Basement Bubba and boxblocker Pig removed the choice aspect by making an effectively unwinnable situation, and that needs/needed change. But this is not that kind of situation.
A Sadako doing this against any survivor who knows how Sadako works is going to waste several minutes getting a single hook and allowing 3-5 gens to pop to no gain. It's a bad strat, and virtually nobody does it because it's a bad strat. It'll stomp newbies, sure, but so does virtually everything; you don't need to play AFK Sadako for that. This doesn't need addressing, and we certainly don't need to nerf one of the weakest killers in the game.
-
Except Sadako has no way of knowing she's sitting in front of the right TV, given there's 6? TVs and 4 survivors (versus 4 and 4 with Pig), and the survivor can also literally walk through her and insert the tape after the first hit even if they're condemned, meaning a smart survivor can walk out of this with just a hook. STBFL could counter this, but a Sadako who's been camping a TV all game doesn't have stacks.
Pig had about a 65% chance of getting at least one kill for free, with the only counter being SWF and insane coordination (that Deadlock or Ruin could destroy instantly.)
-
How do I feel? Eh. That ship had already partway sailed by the time I joined. The first killer release I was around for was Trickster, and... yeah. I think the theme slackening was inevitable; they would run out of accessible horror licenses at some point and have to reach further afield, and on the cosmetic end, silly goofy stuff sells well. We've had Mr. Puddles and present Dwight for years. AoT is at least about a show where giant monsters eat people; that's better than Bunny Feng being chased by a man in a chicken suit.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3220213#Comment_3220213
We don't know, and that's the scary part.
Hopefully with enough noise, they'll revert this idea, but following that will return them to the Store on set rotations. But if there's no backlash to this then I could easily see it being a gone and you missed it type deal.
The thing that scares me is that while the balance team is generally decent at responding to player feedback and making changes/walking back bad calls, the marketing department historically gives no shits and does what it wants. Every unpopular decision I've been here for has been completely ignored no matter how much outcry it gets; sets, complaints about oversaturated characters, complaints about full-priced sets where one part of the body is the same as the default, cosmetic glitch (which really just rolls back into everyone loathing sets.) NFTs, too, if you count those.
I don't have much hope they'll listen to us on this, especially after they've already started to ungate previous cash cosmetics in preparation for the new-and-unimproved shop model.
If they do, that'd be fantastic. I wouldn't care much if there were cosmetics that were only purchasable at certain times of the year. A bit pointless, but it doesn't stop anyone who sticks with the game.
-
It's sneaky, isn't it? They tell us every new cosmetic will be available with shards after a month, and promptly ram stuff through the loophole by releasing cosmetics that don't stay long enough in the store to be purchasable with shards.
I'd rather have outfits arbitrarily be cells-only than have outfits arbitrarily be cells-only and vanish after three weeks. But I get the impression this is happening regardless of what anybody wants.
I would like to hear an official statement about walking back the no exclusives thing, since they've made a lot of noise on this in the past, including unlocking past in-game and irl event items, and this was also the stated reason why we couldn't get prestige outfits in the recent prestige overhaul.
-
@ProfoundEnding said:
Wait so are the Jane and Dwight outfits NEVER coming back, or will they just be removed and then be avaliable in the store again next Halloween?
We don't know for sure, but some of the things they've said in the surveys implied never ever. It'll probably be clearer when they're released on the 11th.
If they'll be available at Halloween only, but every Halloween, then I don't have a problem with any of this. That'd be a massive relief.
-
@Nihlus said:
How dare a cheap game with constant, regular updates and content offer something that makes them money?! It's despicable! Who would want to support a game they play all the time and ensure it continues to keep running? Where're the torches? I've got some pitchforks around here somewhere...
I am happy to support DBD by purchasing paid content and cosmetics. I am not happy to support DBD when they attempt to manipulate me into spending money constantly by imposing FOMO, which is well-documented and rampant as a scummy business practice in online gaming. I am particularly unhappy when this goes against several statements they've made in the past about exclusivity (and was the given reason we couldn't get anything half-decent as a prestige reward, while we're at it) and goes against overwhelming community feedback, which makes the fact that they kept asking us if we wanted it all the more ironic. And I'm also unhappy when they passed this off as a big favor they were doing the playerbase by making the shop more accessible, and then proceeded to make the shop even less accessible and much more aggressively capitalistic than it was before.
@Nihlus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3220141#Comment_3220141
Limited edition stuff is cool. Not everyone should get everything. I see zero issue here and would love to see more of it. I'd love to have things that were more rare or even unique that aren't obtainable. The real problem is this sense of entitlement that you (not necessarily you specifically) seem to think you deserve the ability to have everything everyone else has.
I'd love more with limited time challenges that reward unique cosmetics for accomplishing them. Just more things to make people have things that are actually special.
As someone who enjoys owning exclusive content and was far more amenable to exclusives in the past? That philosophy is gonna bite you in the ass whenever you start playing a new game with exclusives, and every time you take a break from DBD or the month's paycheck is looking kinda tight.
It's not worth it. If I had to weigh the pros of having something cool I can show off to other players so they acknowledge how cool I am (definitely) (probably) (maybe) (probably not), and the cons of finding something I sincerely want and have no way to ever obtain, I'll take no exclusives. Exclusives are better in a game with an economy where you can grind your tail off to purchase the retired item from someone else, but here, if your dream outfit turns out to be a Valentines Day 2023 exclusive and you joined in 2024, you're SOL. And if you join in 2028 and a solid quarter of the outfits the game's ever released are gone forever... gg no re, I guess. I cannot respect the reason they're implementing this, nor does it help anyone except people who want to have the opportunity to flex on others (to which I say P100 and event cosmetics already amply offer that opportunity - bringing that philosophy to the shop is nothing more than a predatory cash grab.)
Seriously, bringing up entitlement from your position is a little hypocritical when the entire thing you're invoking is not wanting other players to be able to access future content so you can be the only person in the room to have it.
-
@HectorBrando said:
Sadly is not the first time they change something for "the best" and then add some monkey paw consequence to it.
The Shrine of Secrets comes to mind, the change they made to grinding looked ok but it also changed the Shrine in a way it makes way more appealing to buy the licensed characters than unlocking their perks on the shrine, since you need 12k Shards for Rank3 perk instead of 2k and 3 Bloodwebs like it was before the rework.
Except you can still level up those perks in the bloodweb? Going for level 2 and 3 is entirely optional. I don't see an issue with that - for the same price of 2000 shards, you get exactly what you got in the old system, except this time it also unlocks it at T1 on everyone. The old way just made it so that the perks could appear in your bloodweb, which hasn't changed.
@VideoGameMage said:
All online/live service games implement a fomo monetization style eventually. It's a worrying trend I don't see going away. One of my other favorite games (overwatch) just realized a f2p game with a fomo style battlepass is more profitable than loot boxes. I hate it but the higher ups don't care.
I'm not sure which I'd hate more, to be honest. Lootboxes are a whole other can of worms (and one I fell prey to once. Never again, JFC.) I think I'd rather at least have the option to purchase a thing I want rather than throw my money into a blender and hope I get the thing I actually want out of it before I run out of money.
But it's a damn shame, because I really respected DBD for not using this model. And here we are.
-
@MrPeanutbutter said:
I don’t understand how this is “predatory”. Nobody is forcing you to buy anything. I personally don’t care about skins *at all*, so I’m not going to buy anything, but I don’t have any problem with a business charging whatever they please if people are willing to buy something that is 100% discretionary.
It's quite literally artificial scarcity, though. I don't know how that isn't predatory business. It's trying to cause a mass buyer panic (aka a surge of people running to snap something up while they still can) for no other reason than to rake in more money.
You can pull artificial scarcity on a luxury good and it's still scummy. Never mind that a significant portion of gamers are teenagers and young adults and don't have fully developed impulse control or a good head for fiscal decisions and what they can afford. Which is why this whole thing works so well.
And from a purely neutral standpoint - such as you, who's never going to spend real money on the game - the end result is that you have fewer options for cosmetics because half the things that would be moving down the pipeline to you are now vanishing into the aether. It's not good for the game.
-
@IronKnight55 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3220092#Comment_3220092
I guess I missed that. What was said?
I don't remember the word-for-word, but the player satisfaction survey that came before the last one cited cosmetics that would be around for a few weeks and then gone forever. They mentioned doing that with licensed content too, which was super scary (because I would hate for them to release, like, a Myers skin and then take it away forever the next month. Licensed characters barely get any cosmetics as is.)
-
@Johnny_XMan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3220068#Comment_3220068
It's an extremely common tactic in the online gaming business model and it's become very prevalent in the last decade.
I'd like to know when has this been a prevalent case in regards to DBD? I want a date. So far the only exclusives they have released have to do with "Buy this game and you get a skin" (Other platforms, Hooked on You etc) Still not enough to say this is a common tactic as far as BHVR is concerned.
There are literally hundreds of skins in the store and some obtainable via IN-GAME currency. I am not sure how BHVR releasing limited time exclusives is that big of a deal. Especially when they release skins almost every month. So I find it odd that you would even bring up WHO exclusives target as if they have no options.
I don't see how you could even bring gambling into the mix since you aren't buying a "mystery" skin... you know exactly what you are paying for.
In that sentence, I was... quite contextually obviously talking about online gaming in general? It's spread across online platforms as they realize just how profitable it is to arbitrarily release stuff and retire it immediately. Ergo BHVR's becoming the latest in a long line of companies to adopt this business model? That is the entire thing people are protesting; they don't want to see it here. I don't know how you could have misunderstood that, because DBD hasn't even been around for a decade.
I don't see what in-game currency has to do with anything when the skins in a FOMO model are currency only? It's the equivalent of those skins that used to be only available with cells, which they recently changed in preparation for the new FOMO system. Except BHVR can get more people to buy them if they threaten to take them away in a few weeks. Which is what I was just explaining.
And yes, these upcoming skins will be currency-only because DBD's new model is that a skin is cells-only for the first month and then can be bought with shards after. The limited-time skins will disappear before they're ever available with shards.
If you don't want to listen to how this works and why they're doing it, or you believe that it's somehow ineffective, that's your own problem. I was extremely clear.
@IronKnight55 said:
I don't get why people are upset. I don't see a problem here. I think the outfits will return again next year anyways.
That wasn't what they said in the surveys.
-
@Johnny_XMan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3220030#Comment_3220030
Since when is having limited time exclusives "predatory business"? Are you in business? Because I can tell you what you are saying doesn't make any sense. You are basically saying "I might miss out on it, so it's bad business..."
On the other hand are telling people HOW to spend their hard earned dollar. So I think you should look at yourself first before calling someone the A word.
It's an extremely common tactic in the online gaming business model and it's become very prevalent in the last decade. Denying that it's predatory ignores the philosophy behind it. Generally, you can count on a fair subset of gamers to be motivated by exclusivity and a desire to show off, but 'fear of missing out' is an even bigger factor. If DBD takes an outfit and puts it in the shop, it'll get modest sales initially (depending on who the character is) and then a very slow drip of continued revenue as stragglers and new players access that content.
But if DBD takes that same outfit, puts it in the shop, and says it'll go away forever in a few weeks - they lose the slow drip, but the immediate burst of sales skyrockets due to players panicking over potential missed opportunities. Maybe it wasn't an outfit they would have bought immediately, or they already have a great outfit for that character, but they kind of like it! What if they want it more in the future? They'd hate to want it and not have it when they could have had it if they'd just acted. So they get it specifically because it's being retired.
I get the feeling DBD got its first taste of this in the Stranger Things going-away sale, whose removal was never planned and forced on them by Netflix, and someone up there decided they wanted to replicate it. So you now have a system where a good chunk of your released content - content that was originally slated to release normally and for everyone forever - gets jangled around like a set of keys in front of an infant, and if you don't grab it - whoops! It's gone. And people that would have been patient about it before and waited until they were in a better financial situation, or who would have lost interest after the initial few days and decided not to get it, jump like trained dogs to snatch the shiny pretty before the shiny pretty gets taken away from them.
And then they do this every single month. Or more. And the same group of whales gets hardcore bilked, while your average would-spend-small-amounts-of-cash gamer loses out because they have far fewer options than they would have if the game wasn't arbitrarily limiting everything to try and make a quick buck.
The prime people it targets are those with poor impulse control/decisionmaking (especially younger people), completionists, and showoffs. It is a way to get people to constantly and repeatedly buy things they otherwise wouldn't by removing the deliberation part of the deciding process and putting pressure on the consumer, and it works so well that it's spread like wildfire.
It's only a step above gachapons in terms of exploitation, and those are straight gambling.