Lost_in_the_Fog
Lost_in_the_Fog
About
- Username
- Lost_in_the_Fog
- Joined
- Visits
- 380
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Endstille said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/754886#Comment_754886
So you think they should include lootboxes and premium accounts as well? The market supports those as well.
I am not saying that they treat their customers wrong but there have been anti consumer choices in the past, pls do remember of the ash-dlc and MoM. Iirc all people basicly said this was going to hurt the game, did they care? Just when probably enough people bought it they said okay let us balance that one. To me sounds like a bait and switch. They didn't care what it did to already weak Killer or how it did affect the game.
To the rift pass, I think there are enough Posts/threads on this Forum which do explain why f2p mechanics are very anti consumer. It is some Kind of a Grey area of Manipulatiing your customers and deceiving them. Until a few days ago people defended it with " you are going to get your Money back" which you don't. They obviously didn't understand the diffrence between ac and € or $.
Gameplay is not going to be affected by it. That is wrong too as you can see that there are already challenges like sacrifice 2 survivors with noed during EGC. If not for a challenge such as this I probably wouldn't run noed on any Killer but there you go. Farming people letting them get to the end only for that but w/e and that was just lvl 2, I really wonder what lvl 3 and 4 have in store for us. That is speculation, at least for me, since i switched back to live but yeah I almost smell the complains about the short amount of time and not being able to complete due to disconnects.
Thanks, I appreciate it. Several people you included, did make a lot of good Posts about the issue and it seems like even more people do not have an issue with it. I just would hate to be part of the "told you so".
You know what I Always hated about this community? Not Talking about everybody ofc but many people have this binary viewpoint, you either are a Killer or Survivormain. I feel like it is a small part that do actually Play both sides and this seems to be a General attitude. You either praise everything a Company does or you are a mindless hater. This can also be seen in the discussions about balance, somebody Shares an opinion, put time and effort into it and people drop a one liner on it.
I think they should put whatever they want in their game. If people don't like it and refuse to buy it they will take that feature away. I think your argument that they are being manipulative to their player base is weak. No one is being forced to buy anything they don't want to. And perks are reworked all the time to provide better balance. To suggest that they are purposely trying to trick people into buying DLC for OP perks and then pulling a bait and switch seems kind of paranoid. How do you explain why some perks get buffed?
-
@HellCatJane said:
People seem to be missing an important fact about what happens when you give someone else your money, especially with no specific contract. This company is not contractually obligated to continue Dead By Daylight just because you buy cosmetics, dlcs, anything else they throw at you to buy. You purchasing something, does not mean you are entitled to gain more content. Once the money goes to them, they spend it how they see fit, not on what you "hope" they spend it on... They could very well spend the money on another game etc. Or even a mansion.... It's theirs now... Not yours. And not dead by daylight's either.
I hope that's clear to people...
@Endstille Even with all your great points, people don't seem to want to listen...
Feels like I keep hearing, "WELL DBD IS GOING TO DIE IF WE DONT DO SOMETHING. CALL UPON THE CALVARY. Where's the charity donations hurry! We're talking bankruptcy potential here.... when they are in excess of millions... SHH we don't discuss those things..." erm.. okay. Sure.. Let's not question their incentives or motives, and the future of this game......
As far as the video is concerned, I am really disappointed no one seems to know anything in its entirety. It didn't make me go YAY let's support this now, either. Good, bad or ugly. For me it remains to be seen how this will turn out and I also agree, I think it didn't have a "critical thought". I was expecting more from what I heard on the forums. I was disappointed in it. :( And I don't see how it shows that the rift isn't a scam or cash grab. If the only excuse and reason for that is "You make your money back", No you don't. You make the auric cells back, MAYBE. it is essentially money you turned into a gift card, and also a rebate (which the video mentioned as well). They will bank on people not being able to finish and get their money and have to spend more each time.
I'm just pointing these things out. And I am not saying I agree one way or another about certain things. "We'll see" is more my stance on it. But the arguments and defense on it, just doesn't add up for me, personally.
No one (at least not me) is saying that every penny spent on Dead by Daylight goes back into Dead by Daylight. Of course their revenue is going to be spent in a variety of ways. But if the revenue stream dries up the game will not continue to be supported in the ways the community wants. People choosing to spend their money on battle pass and cosmetics is about them wanting to give financial support to a company/product that they like.
-
@Endstille said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/754834#Comment_754834
You would lose that bet as that is what i am most proud of, treating my customers Right and that is what they do appreciate.
You want an example? CDPR.
Showed all the other triple AAA the finger with how they handled DLC, showed everybody you can make those games without any microtransactions. They don't stop when it Comes to their games but also their platform.
Sure i am not an expert on everything, but to act like f2p mechanics are inevitable because it is possible to do them is outright a lie.
I didn't say the battle pass was inevitable because it's possible. I said it's happening because the market supports the practice. And if it doesn't they won't continue the battle pass.
Also, you are saying that BHVR is treating their customers wrong because they are introducing an optional feature that includes free content so players aren't required to buy the battle pass? Ummm. . . Ok?
-
@Endstille said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/752856#Comment_752856
They require Money? Oh no!
Thanks for the info, i think your Knowledge is quite limited. Not only do i have a Little bit over 100 employes in my Company but i also value share- / Stakeholder equally. I do not only run a Company that generates profit via enhancing lifequality of People that have disabilities. But there is much more to getting Revenue and making profits than only offering your products/Services on the market. I don't know if you figured that out yet but there are just so many possibilites what you can do with the money such as buyin shares of other companies, you know the good ones?
But enough of that, thanks for your enlightening insight about economics and Business. BHVR is close to about 600 employees so if you think you Need to buy a rift pass because that is some small indie company, you are wrong. In 2008 they made close to 30 Million in Profit, they have around 200million players on mobile.
Should a company do everything for Money? Absolutely not and that is why i am so concerned about f2p in paid games. On a sidenote, i have several living places and not all in just one country.
Just because you own a business and "several living places" doesn't make you an expert on every industry. I'm willing to bet your industry has certain business practices that you fall in line with because that's how business is done.
It's so tiring to hear everyone vilifying BHVR for keeping pace with the practices of their industry. It's not like they're the ones that invented this model of revenue streams. The reason they're doing it is because the market supports it. If it's not popular and people don't buy it they're not going to continues the battle pass model. If you don't want to support it then don't buy it. But stop trying to act like you have some moral high ground here.
-
@pemberley said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/752685#Comment_752685
Love and capitalism rarely meet, except in regards to the greed and money belonging to the criminally wealthy.
Our culture's entire modern concept of love has been shaped by capitalism. To think otherwise is foolish, no offense. How do you find love? By going on interesting dates that cost one or both parties money. How do you express your commitment to loving your partner? By spending tens of thousands of dollars for a wedding. How to you then celebrate that love? By buying roses and anniversary presents with specific stipulations for milestones (25 yrs = silver, 50 yrs = gold.)
Of course not everyone has the financial means to fully participate in these rituals but they are the clear expectation of how you are supposed to express love in our capitalist society. Still think love and capitalism rarely meet?
-
@se05239 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/752485#Comment_752485
People definitely will purchase all 70 levels of a Battle Pass without hesitation.
And why..? That's not a question I can answer.
Because some people understand that continuing to financially support a game they love us the only way to guarantee it stays alive in the longer term. It's really not that hard of a question to answer once you understand economics/capitalism.
-
@oh_0k said:
I don't want to go back to green ranks
But wouldn't you end up back at red ranks in a few matches anyway?
-
Fragile
-
Survivor Perk
"Cry Baby"
When the killer makes any action that would injure survivor the survivor immediately turns to face them and calls them an overpowered cheap trash killer. The killers game immediately crashes and is uninstalled from their system.
-
I feel like even with a "casual mode" you would still run into your frustrating issues. I think a lot of people's complaints really are about people having different play styles. The problem is at the higher ranks the style of play becomes extremely homogeneous because people are trying to check all the boxes of what they need to do to get their pips.
I'm no expert by any means. Rank 16 is the highest I've gotten so far. But I've been keenly aware of how my style has changed. I've also been keenly aware that there are people who hate you no matter what style you play.
When I was brand new I was very cautious and stealthy. I would get trashed on in end game chat and called a potato. As I got better and started getting tired of everyone else getting way more bp I became more outgoing and daring. However, I admit that I will usually escape the game first chance I get. If I try to help a hooked survivor during egc, there's a 99% chance I will be sacrificed. As you can imagine, I've been called a trash teammate for putting my survival first.
Even in casual mode you would have people that slug you and facecamp and do all the other things people don't like. My biggest wish for this community is that everyone didn't have their own internal rules about what makes the game fun or not. If you like to farm, GREAT! But you can't expect everyone to always have that same play style. Sure there are things that annoy me, but I also know that in a bout 10 or 15 min I'll get a fresh chance to do it all over again. But I can see how red ranks would be frustrating because if the single viable play style.
-
Also if the perk is only being used by noob killers who suck I would think you could easily find and break their totems with no problem. So what does that mean about your skills as survivor. . . ?
-
@GuyNamedPubert said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/737889#Comment_737889
What if someone doesn’t care about points? And as you said, it’s a SECONDARY objective. You should worry about the primary objective.
What if the killer doesn't care that you don't take ALL the objectives seriously and feel that you deserve to be hit twice to be put into dying state after last gen?
-
Survivors are going to teabag you no matter what. Well. . . except if you carry them to an open hatch on dying state. But those few probably would as well if they weren't already flat on the ground.
-
@Twinbros said:
Of course they are, why else would the game be so heavily tilted in favor of Killers? And why else would they try to cover up this fact up by making the Survivor pip system a complete joke?
If the survivor (and killer) pip was based on surviving and killing (as it should be), then the number of red rank survivors would be a small handful and the red killers would be a flood. This would more accurately explain the state of the game and how balanced, or not, it is.
The problem is Killers (and Devs) think that in order for a Killer to "win" a match, they need to kill everyone. 3/4 is meh, and 2/4 is a complete loss in their eye. Which if were being honest 2 survivors in a game is a draw, and the most equal match possible.
And it's not survivors that need "buffs" and "better perks" it's killers that need nerfs and perks taken away. Why Killers should be able to see survivors through aura's is quite possibly the dumbest thing ever. Likewise nearly every killer has a form of 1 hit down ability or ######### over gens. Ruin/BBQ chili (the two perks that should be removed) are in every game, that tells you how broken these two perks are.
Do you have any basis for saying they should be removed aside from they make you have to change your tactics as survivor? If anything ruin gives survivors an opportunity to make more bp as it encourages hex cleansing which gain points (yet many survivors would rather ignore them.)
-
Absolutely not! I play survivor about half the time and I 1000% think this is a reasonable perk. This is just another example of something being labelled as toxic just because it is inconvenieces someone. Is it annoying when you drop your item? Yes! But it's not destroyed. You can still pick it back up. Or you can find another chest. Items are completely optional so allowing a killer to knock it out of your hand is perfectly acceptable in my book.
-
@BlueFang said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/716929#Comment_716929
True that would be cool, I just got a Mori daily today for the Demo. So I went in with a Green Mori and Rancor, I decided at the start to mori the obsession who had a rare instaheal. After that I didn't really play to win after that because I hate moris and I felt bad doing it
Come to end game I discover the team was a SWF with two insta heals and they yell at me at the end for being trash and "Moring the obsession like a moron"
Sometimes it's truly difficult to not become toxic when you aren't even treated like a human in 80% of the matches
I get it man. Sorry you had to put up with that. I've gotten to a point where I don't take it personally, although it is still very hard at times. I know it feels like a personal attack but it's usually the other person being a poor sport because you didn't play by their arbitrary rules.
I wouldn't worry about what other people tell you is toxic, especially if it's a specifically included game mechanic like Moris. Being a bully is different and you shouldn't do that! But you don't have to justify any build you make and your actions. People complain about things being toxic because they have to work harder and/or figure out counterplay.
Moris are cool! Especially considering this is as much a horror movie simulation as a vs game. Would I be ok with them being reworked to require 2 hooks before kill? Yes, yes I would. But my point is play the way that's most fun to you and ignore the haters. When people talk trash to me I just say "gg" and leave it at that. As a bonus, it often drives them crazy! ;)
-
I guess my point of view is different because I've only ever reached yellow rank so far. Every game seems like a total game of chance so it's hard to see how a single action like a stun can swing the entire match. I don't take winning every match very seriously because I would never want to play this game again if I did. Besides, it's a horror movie simulation. How can you not feel satisfied on some level by falling victim to the killer? :)
-
@TAG said:
HELLLL NO.
To expand on that, having such a powerful effect be left up to variance is going to be painfully unfun. Either the Killer will be pissed that they lost a ton of momentum with zero way to play around it, or the Survivor will be pissed that their perk did nothing.
Would it really lose that much momentum? Maybe I have too much of a casual player mindset. I don't expect every perk to activate every game. Maybe most people only use perks that are guaranteed to activate. I look at all of that as a game of chance. But I also don't have all the perks for any survivor or killer. Oh I also rarely experience this momentum thing you've mentioned when I play killer. Lol
-
@Milo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/717392#Comment_717392
So then why was old DS an issue?
I don't know? I've only been playing for a few months. What was the issue?
-
@yandere777 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/717377#Comment_717377
The thing is that this idea is flawed on a gameplay perspective and a "fun" perspective. Being robbed out of a deserved hook because you got unlucky is not healthy for the game. Think of old ds, you down someone but since they had ds you ate a stun that you had zero control of. This is similar except not even the survivor has control over it.
Also it isn't fun because as a survivor there could be multiple games where you don't even get to see it activate. Not too mention this perk idea has too much of a reward with zero risk.
You already can play multiple games where this perk doesn't really activate. I mean, yes you do get the extra escape attempts but how often do you really kobe?
I feel this thread is really devolving into the "you must follow the arbitrary player rules" territory. Talking of "deserved hooks." Does that mean there are "undeserved hooks"? Just because a survivor is put in the dying state a hook is "deserved." Sounds a bit like the entitled attitude killers are always accusing survivors of having. Should we get rid of downed survivors being able to heal themselves because it's robbing a killer of their "deserved hook?"
-
@Milo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/717335#Comment_717335
No. It cannot. The thing is with Deliverance - they have to not be hooked 1st AND they are still using one of their health states. So no, the killer didn't waste any time putting a survivor on the hook. (and it's not rng)
"Majority" its 1/4 chance two times in one game. Yeah, for the duration they would be stunned if for example someone flashlight saved, enough time to run to nearby pallet. Well yes, but this is similiar (not fully i know) to old DS - You get downed (wasting time with picking up animation) and then get stunned resulting in a chase prolonging.
Also, unless you are running a basement build you are probably bringing the survivor to a close by hook. How much extra time do you realistically think would be wasted carrying a survivor to a hook. 5-10 sec maybe?
-
@Milo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/717335#Comment_717335
No. It cannot. The thing is with Deliverance - they have to not be hooked 1st AND they are still using one of their health states. So no, the killer didn't waste any time putting a survivor on the hook. (and it's not rng)
"Majority" its 1/4 chance two times in one game. Yeah, for the duration they would be stunned if for example someone flashlight saved, enough time to run to nearby pallet. Well yes, but this is similiar (not fully i know) to old DS - You get downed (wasting time with picking up animation) and then get stunned resulting in a chase prolonging.
Ok but who says a perk can't waste the killer's time. It seems like you might be basing upon the arbitrary rules the community feels players should follow. Also, not understanding your "Majority" part of your comment. Are you implying the killer will still not hook survivor a majority of the time. They'll still have 75% chance of successful hook. If they do drop survivor the perk can't be used again.
-
@Milo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/717129#Comment_717129
But are they that game changing? Not getting hooked (thus resulting in a drop animation) while also wasting killers time with NO REAL counterplay.
Couldn't the same thing be said about Deliverance? Killer has no real counterplay to that and their time is wasted taking survivor to the hook. With Deliverance you can also wait till killer has left before you can 100% unhook.
With my suggestion killer will still be able to hook survivor majority of the time. Also if they drop survivor they are still nearby as killer is only stunned for a few seconds. As for wasting time, isn't that the purpose of countless other perks?
-
@OMagic_ManO said:
I got some slippery meat.
Does it cause exhaustion?
-
@Milo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/717084#Comment_717084
But it kinda sucks for the killer. Random chance that they'll drop the survivor while being hooked (aka wasting time being carried to the hook).
It would be DS 1.0 but a chance instead.
Yeah, but isn't that the point of perks? Gives one side an advantage while disadvantaging the opposing team. Isn't that what ruin does? Makes the survivors waste time by looking for hex totem or dealing with slow repairs. Also, other perks are based on random chance so I don't think it would be too out of the ordinary.
There would still be greater odds of the killer not dropping you. I think making it cause the exhausted effect on the survivor would be fair. But thematically, I think a killer dropping a survivor who is considered "slippery meat" would make sense.
-
@Milo said:
So basically - 4% before even on hook and at almost no cost (if you count having possibly 1 less perk a cost)
Yeah i'd rather not.
No I was thinking more like 15/20/25% chance killer drops you while being hooked. Can only be dropped once per match. Would make the perk less situational (more useful outside of vs trapper matches) and could make a viable alternative to Decisive Strike for people that aren't great at skill checks.
-
@Lost_in_the_Fog said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/716850#Comment_716850
I've always thought it would make sense for Slippery Meat to speed up the wiggle meter when being carried by a killer.
Or even better idea. . . What if Slippery Meat came with a certain percent chance that the killer drops you while hooking you and is stunned. That could be fun!
-
What if the daily challenges were changed to be based on perk builds instead of specific actions? That could be a fun way to encourage varying perk builds while giving bonus bp for successful execution.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
It’d be nice if there were an alternative to DS.
I've always thought it would make sense for Slippery Meat to speed up the wiggle meter when being carried by a killer.
-
@Peanits said:
I do not think this could work. Ideally, matchmaking shouldn't be placing a brown rank survivor with a red ranked killer ever anymore. The only instance in which that would happen is if that survivor is playing with a red ranked survivor. In terms of a brown ranked killers facing a red ranked survivor, this should never happen anymore under any circumstances (following the change in 3.2.1).
That would raise the question, "So why not?"
Simply put, because experienced player(s) could make a new account and play with their red ranked friend to have a 12% repair speed increase. It has a huge potential to be abused.
Also, maybe I'm confused or not being clear. In the last scenario with the red rank survivors and their shady brown ranked "new account" player, the red ranks still wouldn't have a boost. My suggestion wasn't that all survivor speed be tweaked based on the lowest rank. It would be on a per survivor basis. I'm assuming this could be done since there are perks that affect this on a per survivor basis.
For the entire team to get the speed boost all four survivors would have to create new brown accounts. They would then end up being paired with a brown killer and there would no longer be a rank parity. Therefore no speed boost for the shady survivors. Just the typical low rank killer torture they were probably going for by making a new account anyway.
-
@8obot1c said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/714598#Comment_714598
I think they can get banned, if im not wrong
That's what I thought too. . .
-
@Peanits said:
I do not think this could work. Ideally, matchmaking shouldn't be placing a brown rank survivor with a red ranked killer ever anymore. The only instance in which that would happen is if that survivor is playing with a red ranked survivor. In terms of a brown ranked killers facing a red ranked survivor, this should never happen anymore under any circumstances (following the change in 3.2.1).
That would raise the question, "So why not?"
Simply put, because experienced player(s) could make a new account and play with their red ranked friend to have a 12% repair speed increase. It has a huge potential to be abused.
Thanks for the dev viewpoint. I guess more people make completely new steam accounts to gain competitive advantage than I thought. Seems like way too much trouble to me! Lol
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/714614#Comment_714614
Giving Red Rank players an additional 9-12% gen speed for free is not a slight advantage.
I think you are misreading the post. A red rank survivor would never get a speed boost. If they play a red killer they'd be at base speed. Any lower rank killer and the survivor would have a speed penalty.
-
@Mr_K said:
Quite the novel idea to boost gen speeds while the major complant is they go too fast.
Maybe start at yellow ranks with 3% slower and move up from there. (Not a serious idea, don't freakout)
No freaking out here. Lol Just mainly tossing out an idea for some brainstorming. Also it would only boost gen speed if a high rank killer faced low rank survivors. If a low rank killer faced a high rank survivor group it would slow gen speed.
-
@TAG said:
What happens if a Red Rank player SWFs with a bunch of Red Rank Survivors using Brown/Yellow-Rank accounts to pair against a Red Rank Killer??
Well there are always going to be people who try to cheat the system. Unfortunately that's life and can't be avoided. I don't have any statistics but I would imagine very few players actually go to those lengths to gain a slight competitive advantage.
-
@PickCollins said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/714412#Comment_714412
After 5 minutes in queue, ignore ranks and throw them in.
And then you are back in the same situation of people complaining about rank matching. . .
-
@PickCollins said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/714345#Comment_714345
Killers were whining about wait times for literally forever. Where is the "get over your entitled whiney selves" for them?
And guess what? Killer queue times are gonna spike back up again when BHVR snubs Survivior mains enough for them to stop playing. You can only demand the devs abuse the other side so hard before they eventually say enough and suddenly ur left with long queue times again bc nobody wants to play the game.
If the matchmaker is ######### Surviviors, it needs fixed. If the matchmaker is ######### killers, it needs fixed. No there is no solution to everything, but there's still things they can do to prevent 10+ minute queue times and still reduce the instances of rank 10 killers facing rank 4 Surviviors and vice versa.
It's not entitled or whiney to think that. It's common effing sense. And the fact that you can't see that makes your "I'm and electrical engineer" claim shaky. And even if it was true, you wouldn't understand coding or the matchmaking algorithm.
Also, common sense is an arbitrary concept. Just because something seems like it's "common sense" doesn't mean it's easy to implement technically.
-
@PickCollins said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/714345#Comment_714345
Killers were whining about wait times for literally forever. Where is the "get over your entitled whiney selves" for them?
And guess what? Killer queue times are gonna spike back up again when BHVR snubs Survivior mains enough for them to stop playing. You can only demand the devs abuse the other side so hard before they eventually say enough and suddenly ur left with long queue times again bc nobody wants to play the game.
If the matchmaker is ######### Surviviors, it needs fixed. If the matchmaker is ######### killers, it needs fixed. No there is no solution to everything, but there's still things they can do to prevent 10+ minute queue times and still reduce the instances of rank 10 killers facing rank 4 Surviviors and vice versa.
It's not entitled or whiney to think that. It's common effing sense. And the fact that you can't see that makes your "I'm and electrical engineer" claim shaky. And even if it was true, you wouldn't understand coding or the matchmaking algorithm.
The get over yourselves comment was directed towards everyone who whines about wait times. And if you have such a great understanding of the matchmaking algorithm then please, specifically tell us all how to fix this. I'm sure the devs would love advice from an expert like you.
-
I agree with the statements that it's much more logical that Demo can break pallets vs Legion breaking every pallet they vault. The fact that Legion can vault pallets at all is what makes them unique among killers. In general I disagree with the logic of "Killer A is more powerful so now Killer B should be changed since they have a similar add-on/perk as the rework of Killer A."
The fact that the killers have different powers and abilities is a GOOD thing. There should be some more powerful killers that are easier for newbies to play and there should be trickier ones that are more challenging to master for experienced players. Otherwise the game would be boring! We already have survivors that are basically reskins of each other after a certain point. Do we really want to make the killers more homogeneous? I don't!
-
@Kasaki said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/698064#Comment_698064
You're right, now I want a middle finger emote in the game , sounds amazing
It would certainly add clarity to the intent of the action! Lol
-
@NuclearBurrito said:
Plague is toxic
Hahahahaha! Well done!
-
@Talmeer said:
Hitting an survivor on a hook is considered as toxic behavior (not official... but you know by survs)?
I need to admit I have done it 3-4 times I guess...
Well... on the other hand, there are so many rules already made by players, nobody can follow them and still have fun in the game -_-.
Edit: Just out of a mood. Like... "I still got ya!"^^.
So when I first played the game I started as survivor. A killer hit me on hook and I thought it must have scored points or achieved some other purpose. When I started playing killer I did this to survivors because I thought I was supposed to. . . Oops!
The subject of intent has been brought up in several posts. In this circumstance I had no intent of toxicity. I think that's why it's been easier to not jump to the conclusion that a lot of these actions aren't meant as harassment. It does seem that a lot of people jump to the opposite conclusion. That's the whole reason I started this post. To highlight that it's often very unclear what the intent is behind certain actions.
It's been awesome to get to hear so many different perspectives!
-
Thanks for weighing in with the dev perspective @not_Queen! I appreciate that this forum exists and gives us all a chance to be Player 1. Oh and thanks to you all for making such a great game that stirs so much passion in it's community.
-
@HawkAyeTheNoo said:
I still find it hard to believe people out there get triggered by survivors "pointing". Pointing ffs.
"Devs, he pointed at me". Catch yourselfs on.
Yeah, I always thought that survivors were pointing to signal to nearby survivors "Hey, the killer is RIGHT THERE!!!" Then I found out it was supposed to be making me angry. . . ummmm ok?
-
@MineAntoiya I think you make some great points and they tie into the point I was making. I agree that there are behaviors that are clear bullying and that is just cruel and wrong. But I do think that the word toxic in the context of this game and bullying are not interchangeable but they are often incorrectly used interchangeably. Because of this I think some of the more innocent things that have been labeled as toxic has led to people feeling bullied when exposed to them when they are fairly insignificant. Bullying is terrible and should be condemned for sure! I do also respect the fact that if someone has been bullied in the past that some of the more innocent things can be perceived more harsh.
-
@yakul1nausicaa said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/697732#Comment_697732
Mochan last sentence
I don't know. . . I took the words "even more" to mean "additional."
-
@yakul1nausicaa said:
The hypocrisy of claiming people who engage in toxic behaviour are more mature than those who are irritated by it is laughable.
Who made that claim? None of the posts seem to imply that to me.
-
Also having this issue. Was playing a little while ago. Now it keeps saying NO NETWORK CONNECTION.
-
@Gardenia said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/691890#Comment_691890
Maybe try not to get so worked up over my opinion, my reasoning of why they should be removed isn't because it's "unfun". Its because killing multiple people in succession with only 1 hook makes for a very short game where both the killer and Survivors don't have much of a match.
I'm not the only one who shares these sentiments. And also, moris are fine it's the ebony Mori that is problematic.
I don't see what the problem is with having a shorter match every now and then. I'm assuming you start another one as soon as it's over. This whole game is about variety of gameplay. Having moris and some shorter matches keeps players on their toes and ads to variety.
-
@Gardenia said:
My opinion, Ebony Moris are unhealthy for this game. I also, find them greatly unfun to go against and a waste of time because everything you do in the match means nothing because they'll just kill you on the spot.
You think they aren't fun so they should go? Well what if killers find them to be fun? When I play as killer I don't think flashlights are very fun so why don't we take those away? I play both killer and survivor but I have to say that the overwhelming sense of entitlement by survivor mains is the worst part of this game. Unfortunately that's the one thing the devs can't fix. People need to realize that all the elements of the game are well thought out. Some work better than others. But if you started cherry picking out ever tiny thing that people complain about you would end up with a broken and boring mess. Maybe try to think beyond yourself and look at the big picture. This game is overall fun and entertaining otherwise you wouldn't be playing it.