Malkhrim
Malkhrim
About
- Username
- Malkhrim
- Joined
- Visits
- 3,213
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Mr_K said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3954991#Comment_3954991
Applying pressure, looping, knowing when to drop and when to break a pallet or not, are not explained in either
How do you go about teaching someone with zero knowledge of the game this? The concepts of safe vs unsafe pallets is something you learn over time. When you drop a pallet is not a science but a feeling when another loop is not possible based on position and experience.
I understand it doesn't feel obvious and a lot of things can't apply to every situation, but to bring an example, one very basic thing to be learned while playing survivor is that you want to loop the killer when they are close so you can waste as much of their time as you can in a single pallet. Also, you want to loop a killer on a dropped pallet until you force them to break the pallet so you can gain distance.
As killer, the same logic applies but on the opposing side, and because of that, you usually don't want to break a pallet if a survivor immediately leaves the tile, only if they stay on it, and on that situation evaluate if breaking the pallet will be needed or not.
But because these stuff aren't explained anywhere within the game, many begginer survivors just drop a pallet, immediately leave the tile and get hit, because they don't even know they are supposed to loop! Many beginner killers just instantly break every pallet and don't understand what they are supposed to do since they never catch up to survivors. Just a very brief basic explanation about this on the tutorial would make a difference to at least tell new players what they should learn and aim to do in first place.
-
Yeah, the tutorial and the game manual are indeed very lacking. Lots of basic stuff about the game, like applying pressure, looping, knowing when to drop and when to break a pallet or not, are not explained in either of them, so people rely A LOT on content creators to learn to at least play decently. But not every DbD player is going to immediatly look for online guides, the game itself should provide more information so new players didn't feel lost right upon starting.
-
@100PercentBPMain said:
I hace never seen this; i hope you bought a lottery ticket
After this, I guess I might…
-
@Mr_K said:
It's very festive.
So… I can assume you haven't met the same issue right? 😶
It's so strange. I thought this would be talked about a lot at the forums at some point, but I didn't see any other post about it.
-
@camping_site said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3953360#Comment_3953360
Why wouldn't I put it in the headline if I see it as suiting?! Just because you chose to misdirect the point of this thread with semantics and I pointed it out?! Makes no sense and try better.
The second part of your argument just doesn't address nor my response, nor the core subject of this thread and is just "putting words in my mouth" by twisting my arguments to absurd.
Dude, if you think the title is suiting, then discussing the usage of the word "gaslight" IS relevant. It's funny that at one time you try to act as if it's relevant and then when you get called out for it you pretend that it isn't anymore. It's not "misdirection" if people are disagreeing with a point you tried to make in your own freaking title, don't be dishonest. Also, your previous comment wasn't even replying to me. You see, I'm not the only one talking about that, you MADE the thread about gaslighting the moment you chose that title.
The second part of my comment is straight up adressing a completely non-sensical thing you tried to argue multiple times on this thread. You implied more than once it was gaslighting because of some lack of transparency or disclosure. I pointed out why that doesn't even make sense, and of course you simply choose not to give a proper response, you have no good response to give and choose to deflect instead.
-
@camping_site said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3953281#Comment_3953281
Arguing about gaslighting is irrelevant to the point I made. Also, I explained my reasoning, so everyone can post their POV about reliability of stats.
However, if we you wish to scrutinize my terminology, my POV is that devs create stats and use it as a guidance for "balance", i.e., 60/40. But they are aware that huge chunk of DC matches would anyway end up in 3k or 4k, i.e., snowballing Nurse, Oni , Blight and many other situations
without disclosing it, makes SoloQ survivors question their sanity when their stat sheet shows over 40% escape rate, when actually I would barely escape once every 6-7 matches. That is gaslighting.Arguing about gaslighting is irrelevant to the point I made.
Then you shouldn't have put the word "gaslight" in the title, nor ended your post with "Gaslighting feels so demeaning". Simple as that. If you imply the devs are "gaslighting" you and calls attention to it in the title, then expect replies about this subject.
However, if we you wish to scrutinize my terminology, my POV is that devs create stats and use it as a guidance for "balance", i.e., 60/40. But they are aware that huge chunk of DC matches would anyway end up in 3k or 4k, i.e., snowballing Nurse, Oni , Blight and many other situations
without disclosing it, makes SoloQ survivors question their sanity when their stat sheet shows over 40% escape rate, when actually I would barely escape once every 6-7 matches. That is gaslighting.You just described an entire situation that has nothing to do with gaslighting but inserted the word "sanity" in the middle of it just to make it seem it had something to do with it at all. You are simply talking about people seeing displayed data that doesn't correspond to how they think things are based solely on your personal experience, that's it, not even close to the definiton of gaslighting. Do you think any local research institute is "gaslighting" you everytime you see data about your country that is different from what you expect? Even if there's a flaw on the method used to gather data, that is not "gaslighting" in any shape or form.
And the mere fact that you can come up with the interpretation you are making about the stats shows there IS transparency. They made clear what were the stats and what matches were counted on it, than you made an assumption about how to interpret the stats and what is not really shown with the method chosen. ACTUAL lack of transparency would be not even letting the players know the time data was collected and that some matches didn't count, and even that would not be "gaslighting", by definiton.
-
@Mr_K said:
I thought that too at first. A friend and I played a custom match to test out the new killer and they just pop up behind you. Was confusing because the power said they would grab you. It wasn't until we both entered the door that it became apparent.
Yeah, the power says "moving to a door already in use by a Survivor will cause The Animatronic to grab that Survivor". That is a bit misleading, as a survivor watching cameras is using a door as well. And it's actually easier to picture THAT as a door "in use by a survivor" than a teleport, as the door only has a function at the start of the teleport while the survivor is in the security room during the rest of the animation.
-
This is not gaslighting at all and isn't even remotely close to the concept of gaslighting. People in this forum should stop throwing misused words around to victimize themselves or acuse the devs of a supposed bias/favoritism that doesn't really exist.
Counting ALL matches would mean those where a survivor DC's very early to go next, just as those where the survivors end up losing because one accidentally disconects and become a bot, would all be part of the stats, which would skewer them even harder. There isn't a perfect way of accurately representing all matches in stats.
Also, the latest data is from before the removal of hook suicides. That means all those matches survivors lost because of others giving up on hook during the going next epidemic where being counted. The data was skewered in a way that INFLATED kill rates, not deflated them, and that's probably one of the reasons they aimed for average kill rates of 60%.
-
@VibranToucan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3952330#Comment_3952330
Comparing one killer to one role is a way better comparation to comparing one killer to what is essentially a set of skins.
If that was the case, the devs would even announce each new chapter with a new killer and a new skin, instead of one new character for each side. Even though their gameplay doesn't change, survivors are still separate characters, and the dev never said they didn't like the Skull Merchant's playstile, they said they didn't like Skull Merchant herself, the character. He could be talking about either the gameplay or even how she looks, because that's a reason that could lead to not liking something too, and it would totally apply to Sable.
Again, Sable is a CHARACTER, survivor is a ROLE, Skull Merchant is a CHARACTER. Not liking a character is comparable to not liking another character, not to disliking an entire role.
-
@VibranToucan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3952316#Comment_3952316
Survivors are all just reskins of one another with no intrinsic abilities. Saying you hate a certain Survivor just says you hate a certain set of skins. Killers meanwhile have unique powers. There is a reason on one account all Killers have linked but separate MMR, meanwhile Survivor has the same MMR matter which one you play.
And? Comparing not liking a killer to not liking a role is still not the same thing. Sable is a CHARACTER in the game, just like the CHARACTER the dev said they didn't like. Nothing crazy about that. Saying "I don't like survivors lol" would only be comparable to saying "I don't like killers lol", not to disliking a specific character.
-
Except they did purposefully make changes to gut her to bandaid a "problem" with the plan to rework her.
Define "gut her". She got nerfed because her kit was problematic as shown by both feedback from the community AND stats, so they had to do something to mitigate the problem until she got a full rework. The other person here was claiming they "they butchered the character to deliberately make them basically unplayable", which is not true. One thing is to nerf a killer, the other is to deliberately make them unplayable, something that she is not. He also talked as if the dev was laughing at someone's expense. No, they did not talk about a real person or players, they talked about a fictional character in a video game.
for a member of the team to both make and also plaster on a loading screen after all the issues surrounding the topic
The issue being mainly about a character being too unbalanced on a video game and then getting nerfed. Nothing nowhere near as serious as some of you are acting as it was. And if you somehow was talking about toxicity among players, again, voicing a brief opinion about a VIDEO GAME CHARACTER has nothing to do with an attack against its players.
It does come off in a negative light to killers, especially those who enjoyed Skull Merchant
Only if we are assuming killer mains in general liked skull merchant and were against her nerf. Not really the case. The complaints about Skull Merchant didn't come only from "survivor mains", lots of people play both roles, you know?
and just gives all the toxic players who had irrational hate for the character a sense of being justified in their excessive toxic whining and ability to cry until things get nerfed into the ground
You are talking about "irrational hate" (for a CHARACTER, mind you. Not a real person), "toxic whining" and people "crying", but you are the one here using disrespectful language over a character that got nerfed nine months ago. At least one of the reasons people didn't like Skull Merchant was very rational, she was unfun to play against, that's it, no one is enabling some toxic crowd just because they say they didn't like (and I will say that again) a FICTIONAL CHARACTER in a VIDEO GAME. It is a character designed by the devs themselves and you are acting as if disliking it somehow should be taken as an attack against players.
-
@VibranToucan said:
Of course harassment is terrible and I hope the people who did that get their accounts suspended.
That doesn't mean that quote was okay tho. I am pretty confident if a dev said "I don't like Survivor lol" they would not let this quote into the game. And if they did it would like cause even more outrage. It genuinely seems to me like the Devs want people to hate Skull Merchant more so they can justify turning her into a completely different character.
You are comparing "I don't like [character]" to an hypotetical "I don't like [role]". A better comparison would be a dev saying "I don't like Sable, lol", and there would be nothing wrong with that.
And again, it's the anniversary event, with personal comments from devs in the loading screen for fun, not comments made to represent the devs as a whole. It's kind of ridiculous to assume it is not okay for someone who doesn't even work on balance changes to personally say they don't like a character in a video game.
-
@Marzipan210 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3952280#Comment_3952280
In the context of how SM was butchered and how the community harassed SM players with slurs and death threats all the same - it comes across as Us vs Them to me. If not us vs them then it is 100% tone deaf and still doesn't belong in the game.
Huge stretch on your part. What your comment is implying is that, since some people were toxic towards Skull Merchant players, than anyone who says they don't like Skull Merchant are taking a side among the toxic people and against Skull Merchant players. If a comment here sounds like Us vs Them, it is yours. Not liking a character in a video game is on anyone's right and has nothing to do with having something against people who play them.
-
@xGodSendDeath said:
Attacking them personally like that is wrong but remember people paid money for this character. I'm sure it's pretty annoying having the dev team laugh about how they butchered the character to deliberately make them basically unplayable
Comments like this are part of the problem. You are just making up stuff that wasn't done or said by anybody. A dev saying he doesn't like the Skull Merchant is not "laughing" at anybody, and this whole idea that the devs nerfed Skull Merchant "to deliberately make her unplayable" is based on some baseless conspiracy theory that claims the devs said that themselves, when they never did.
Am I saying no comment from a dev should never be criticized? No, but one thing is valid criticism, the other is enabling hoaxes and misquotes, SPECIALLY when trying to somehow make the problem about that on a thread about the dev in question receiving death threats.
-
@Zakon05 said:
Oh I don't think much of Springtrap's power budget went into the door grabs, it seems kinda like Dredge's locker grabs in that it's not something that will trigger much and it wasn't designed to. But there's no achievement to get 15 locker grabs as Dredge.
Dredge's locker grabs are way better designed and far more likely to happen, too. Most survivors NEED locks to counter Dredge properly and spend a lot of time in a match touching lockers because of them, and a Dredge player can take advantage of that with aura reading perks or one specific blue add-on. But no survivor needs to touch Springtrap's security doors at all, not even for the cameras. If anything, trying to use door travel or cameras is a bad idea, because it puts you at risk AND wastes time that could be spent doing gens.
-
I've been playing Springtrap almost every day since his release, most of the matches with a build made specifically to facilitate that achievement, and I only got 11 grabs so far. Yesterday I had 10, so I played for hours only to get ONE eventually, and there are days I get NONE regardless of how many matches I play. It relies way too much on luck, that luck being… being matched against survivors who haven't realized yet that doors are a death trap.
By the way, the build I use to make the achievement easier involves taking information perks and add-ons to see when a survivor is about to use a door and teleport there, but there are still many, many, MANY matches no one ever uses a door, so you still need luck and the build only helps you to take the oportunity when it happens. I use Lethal Pursuer and Floods of Rage for aura reading, the green add-on that increases the speed you go through doors and the purple add-on that gives you killer instinct of survivors near doors when you wind up your axe. Still, the add-ons gave me two or three grabs at best, and I'm pretty sure the perks gave me NONE.
Seriously, there wasn't a single time I noticed the aura of a survivor getting to a door, teleported there and it resulted in a grab. Nobody tries to interact with doors at the beginning of a match when Lethal Pursuer works, and a lot of coincidence would be needed for someone to use a door 9 seconds after an unhook (I wouldn't even try using BBQ, everyone knows Springtrap usually enters the nearest door after hooking a survivor). The killer instinct add-on at least worked a few times, but even then, most of the time you detect killer instinct the survivor is just on a gen near a door. When they actually interact with them, I usually only realize it when I hear a security camera's sound effects, then find which door they are using via killer instinct, then teleport there, but most survivors just let go of the door before I can grab them. There was ONE time a survivor teleported towards me by accident and got grabbed even sooner, another one they didn't let go in time and another one they actually tried travelling through doors and I predicted with killer instinct. All the other cases were not related to any perk or add-on at all. So most of the time you simply… play until you notice someone making a mistake, like using a camera and taking too long to let go or entering a door during a chase (if that happens, don't m1 then at the door, wait for them to enter and then enter yourself, so it will count towards the achievement).
-
It's a combination of multiple things. Not only he's a new killer people are still learning how to counter, he has multiple stuff that are either strong in the hands of a skilled player or that less skilled survivors have a lot of trouble dealing with:
- He can travel across the map at any time, with no cooldown (it's good to remember that Freddy's teleport is one of the thing that makes him have really high kill rates, and Security Doors are much better than that, they have no cooldown!)
- Door spawns closer to gens and give survivors less time to react than any other means previous killers had for travelling to gens. Seriously, compare them to Xenomorph's stations, Freddy's teleport, Sadako's TVs, the Dredge's lockers and Demogorgon's portals. Portals and TVs can be disabled, lockers can be locked, but NOTHING can stop a door from opening. They also spawn consistently close (save a few exceptions, like insinde buildings) and sometimes even FACING gens, and Springtrap can attack someone almost right away, while all the others have longer animations.
- Stealth. Yeah, stealth by itself is weak in this game, but it works all the time against less experienced survivors. Sadako and Pig always had weirdly high kill rates because of this, even on their weaker versions. Springtrap has an undetectable effect that lasts for 20 seconds. That's more than Chucky and Skull Merchant.
- Having a ranged attack gives even LESS time for the survivor to react in any of these situations. If he comes out of a door and the survivor isn't immediatly at his range, he can throw his axe. He can also sneak around survivors and throw the axe at them before his footsteps get close enough to make his location obvious. He can do stuff like sneak around a doorway in a room and throw his axe right as he comes into the survivor's line of sight, not needing to approach before attacking like other stealth killers. That makes a huge difference, but even out of stealth, it's a good ability at chase!
- Two different movement speeds: sometimes a survivor is confident at looping him at 110% speed… but doesn't realize when he is a bit faster, so they end up getting greedy at a loop and taking hits because of this mistake.
- Double tapping potential: combining his stealth with his axe, he can approach an outpositioned survivor, throw the axe point-blank, quickly catch up to them and either grab or down them, making for an insanely short chase, which makes a lot of difference on winning a match. The survivor often is trying to dodge his point-blank hatchet and ends up losing distance during the speed boost.
- Killer instinct he can choose where to apply AND add-ons that reveal survivor's locations. Being able to know where survivors are without taking perk slots and also an ability to immediatly travel there is HUGE. Allows him to apply pressure more easily.
- Multiple strong add-ons: he has add-ons to improve his stealth, reveal auras, killer instinct, break pallets faster, leave survivors exhausted, block pallets and lock the exit for survivors. So multiple ways of messing with them.
So, he seems to be a simple killer at first, but there are many little details when playing against him that catch survivors off-guard.
-
Well, right now the crow system is disabled when the hatch spawns or EGC starts… they should extend this for when there's only one survivor standing, simple as that.
I mean, other tweaks to the crow system will be necessary, as they sometimes get people who aren't afk nor trying to hold the game hostage, but fixing the slug for the 4K scenario is the most simple part.
-
Dracula would be nice too, he has three forms and only one changes with the skin.
I just wish they had thought of this when they released him RIGHT before the Houndmaster.
-
I understand why it was added, and a system that actually worked would be nice, but I also think the removal of self-unhook atempts and death on skill checks already did most of the job, besides the new DC penalty system. The Go next prevention is not even working right now, but going next already doesn't feel like an epidemic on the same level as before.
-
@100PercentBPMain said:
I'm not sure. toba landing is an infamously bad Singularity level
I don't play Singularity a lot, but I guess that it's bad for being cluttered, and perhaps for those alien trees also being bad for high biopod placements?
I'd get that, but couldn't the map have been made with the intention of being good for Singu because of the colors? The pink and purple colors on it are very similar to those of Hux's flesh and his biopods, which initially suggests his biopods could be hard to spot there, as their colors wouldn't stand out.
I can't tell myself if that makes a difference in-game because… if I ever played as or against Singu in Toba's Landing, it was right after his release, and everyone (including myself) was doing so bad while trying him out in every map that I wouldn't have noticed a difference. Today I get better results while playing as him, but I rarely pick him anyway so there are many maps where I dind't even get to play as Hux yet.
-
@GeneralV said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3948958#Comment_3948958
Generally speaking, my friend, the easier it was to sneak up on a survivor the better the map was for him, as it gave you the advantage over asleep survivors. In my opinion, that meant his worst map was Blood Lodge. Very few opportunities for sneak attacks and many, many pallets.
As for Badham, it was indeed an interesting map. The biggest complaints from killers were the main building itself, which had two more pallets than it currently has, if memory serves me right. And the house of pain. But overall, I don't think it was that harsh for killers, most of them could handle it.
Ooof, I have some bad memories of old Blood Lodge. Some people even called it pallet town.
And yeah, old Badham's only really strong spots were these two buildings, but the house of pain was a direct copy from the one in Haddonfield, while the main building was very unique to that map. I remember Nurse and Hag being the only two killers that could easily deal with it, while other killers were often advised to stay away from the main building unless they really needed to protect the gen down there.
-
@GeneralV said:
Surprised you didn't mention Badham, my friend.
Now, thinking of my all-time favorite killer, Old Freddy, and Badham is interesting because it works… to some extent. Badham Preschool has always been regarded as a survivor-sided map, but, much like Haddonfield, the structures could be used to your advantage as Old Freddy because, if survivors were asleep, it is easier to sneak in through a structure then an open field.
And, if they are awake, there is no grass to indicate where, exactly, you are.
Now, things get a bit more complicated when you start chasing people. Old Freddy was all about controlling the map, which works well on Badham, but by the time you reach your chases there would be a lot of pallets to go through.
It works partially, at least based on my experience.
I thought about it… but I wasn't sure if it had any advantage for old Freddy, so I was guessing it was one of the most neutral ones like Eyrie of Crows for the Artist. I played Old Freddy quite a lot, but didn't know about him deeply enough to judge how maps affected him, I guess. In my personal experience I usually didn't have a lot of trouble approching awake people anyway, the hardest part was the chase, but you clearly knew the killer much better.
Also, Badham has been a survivor-sided map for years, but I believe it wasn't that much when it was released, right? I mean, it's been years and I don't remember all the details, but one thing I remember is that Badham was the first map to be reworked and one of the changes was an increase in the number of pallets. Old Badham had some really unsafe zones. Some loops wasted a lot of the killer's time, but once their pallet was gone, it created a dead zone. Perhaps it would still be more survivor-sided than many maps today, specially with that main building, but at that time, when maps were more survivor-sided overall, it felt more forgiving for killers.
-
Killer queues are longer than usual for more than one reason, and people simply dropping the survivor role is hardly a significant one.
- A killer released, but not a survivor, so people are trying out the new killer.
- This chapter just made the game peak in player number, so there are more people playing than ever and many of these new players are here to try out the new killer, which means there are more killers than usual but not that many more survivors than usual.
- This is the first time a separate queue gets added to play only on the new map. That by default splits the playerbase in two and makes queues take at least twice as long.
Give it a few weeks and the queue will go back to normal.
-
@GeneralV said:
To be fair, you cannot block Freddy's teleport to gens (which is good, you shouldn't).
Yeah, but Freddy has a cooldown even when he cancels his power. Springtrap has no cooldown and can just teleport around the map to check gen after gen after gen with no cooldown. That makes him ridiculously good at holding the final 3 gens even WITHOUT having a 3-gen formation. In other words, even if the gens are far apart, he can treat it as a 3-gen.
I'm not fully sure of what would be the best way of fixing this, but a nice option would be to allow survivors to temporarily block or disable doors, BUT, by doing it, they would risk being grabbed if he teleports at the same time, just like Dredge. It would be a nice way of incentivizing survivors to put themselves in situations where they can get grabbed at a door, just like it happens with Dredge's lockers. Right now there is no reason for survivors not to ignore doors altogether unless they are sure Springtrap is too busy to walk through doors himself, which makes door grabs a bit rare, and it will probably only become less and less frequent as people learn to play against Springtrap, which is a shame. The door jumpscare animation is one of the coolest things about this killer.
-
Not far enough: saving multiple loadouts.
I liked it when it was introduced because to me the main thing that keeps the game fun even after thousands of hours played is trying out a variety of builds, sometimes new ones, sometimes coming back to those you like to play the most… but then it releases and we can only have THREE different loadouts? That only allows you to save two builds and forces you to keep changing the third in order to make new ones. Sometimes is just your strongest build for that character and your favorite build for fun, while you just can't save a third one if you want to try out new stuff. Come on, in a game that keeps releasing content for us to try new perk builds every 3 months, we should be allowed to have at least twice the amount of loadouts we have today!
Survivors can handle it a little better because different characters have only cosmetic differences, so you can use each survivor to save 3 different survivor builds, but for killer, each one with a different power and add-ons? 3 loadouts is simply not enough.
-
@Streamsniper said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3941989#Comment_3941989
This is why I double check on any cosmetics before I purchase them or wear them if I got them for free. I'm not going to suffer through that nonsense again. YouTube is where I mostly get the cosmetics info from or I'll ask one of my friends if they own it to say if it covers the screen too much. If I can't find it, I simply won't buy it. It saved me a lot of money, time or stress. Couldn't be bothered with it, you know?
There are also skins that are pay to win like Were-Elk for the Huntress which you can't hear the lullaby or really small weapons that let you see more. There is this Nurse weapon which give you the least screen coverage.
Yeah, the shop having cosmetics with this problem and not even allowing you to see it in the store is really bad. Specially in a game with no refund system. So you can spend money (or iri shards obtained after a LOT of time playing) and only then realize you payed to make your gameplay experience worse.
Pay to Win cosmetics that give less information to survivors are even worse than Pay to Lose. The Were-Elk is… not as bad now as it was before, but the lullaby is still a bit harder to listen to, and I'm pretty sure Naughty Bear still doesn't have a breathing sound like Trapper normally does.
Smaller weapons are not as big of a problem because weapons in general shouldn't occupy screen space that hinders your vision to begin with, but it's quite baffling that they have such a big difference from other cosmetics, that only emphasizes how much difference a cosmetic can make, specially when comparing the biggest ones to the smaller ones. Since we are talking about the Dredge, I believe Decaying Misery (the one with antlers) has the smallest arm among all Dredge skins. So matching Decaying Misery's arm + Mycelum Nightmare's weapon would make for the smallest screen coverage possible.
Another killer that really suffers from Pay to Lose cosmetics is Deathslinger. I don't have many skins for him, but I've seen at least one youtuber once playing with different Slinger skins and showing how their guns have less accurate sights, because they are is distorted or obstructed by some altered shape at the top of the weapon (some of the design changes for the sights are a bit distracting as well). Imagine a skin that literally makes the character's power harder to aim with. -
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/HB19NP0TMJR5/dredge-arms.png
BHVR literally doesn't care if Dredge cosmetics block large portions of the screen, because Crab Dredge and the Unwanted Toy cosmetics, are still blocking way too much of the screen.
Wow, when it comes to space occupied horrizontally, this one is even worse! Even though it's not clear which skin has the worst arm (since one is taller and the other is wider), this one has a really big weapon too! This is awful!
-
Angelica Ross did a terrific job as Orela's voice, indeed. I also love how her voicelines are written, she is the only survivor besides Nicolas Cage to directly mention and comment on in-game elements, like "let's avoid the hooks and hit those generators" or "stupid hook".
-
@Streamsniper said:
crustacean threat has the same issue where the crab's claw is considerably blocking the screen.
There are Meet Your Maker weapons that does the same thing. Not related to Dredge but similar issues.
I remember Otzdarva even made a video about the Wraith's Meet your Maker weapon when it released. During the wiping animation, it covered pretty much the whole screen. Don't know if it's still like that, tho, I don't use that cosmetic.
Honestly, certain kinds of Pay to Lose cosmetics are becoming way too common. I get that some of them are kind of unavoidable (like, if you want to get creative with skins and make some with cool unique visual effects, some of them are going to make you much easier to spot from afar or even behind objects. I'd even say the current rift made a good job of making such visual effects more subtle, like the Dredge's fungus spores and the survivors' flying petals), but there is so much now, including skins that are too noisy and some that even make the killer a little taller (which can make them easier to track in certain loops), that's way too many skins that come with some kind of disavantage.
-
@Langweilig said:
Another hard offender is garden of joy where no jungle gym has a single window.
The jungle gym conected to the main building's god-window usually has one. But I wouldn't be surprised if sometimes it spawned without one.
-
Today I noticed a bus loop in Azarov's Resting Place that had no window at all, both possible window spawns were closed… was that always possible and I never noticed? Or is it new? Usually the bus loops in any Autohaven map have a window either in the middle or on the rear end.
-
@thrive2survive said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3940404#Comment_3940404
So pretty much what happened with Tomb Raider and DND? May as well get 1 of the most popular franchises ever conceived in here. I see no down side to it. I think it's crazy that Disney was interested in it. We may see something Star Wars related happen a lot sooner than people think.
It's not the same thing at all.
D&D isn't primarily horror, but it has horror in it. It has instructions on how to make horror campaigns and it's full of monsters with inspirations from multiple subgenres of horror, like cosmic horror, gothic horror and body horror. Vecna himself is a monster with a horror-inspired look. His most recent campaign even includes a trip into the gothic horror-inspired plane and a few monsters like… these.
He fits DbD way more than anything from Star Wars ever will.
And I didn't really like Tomb Raider coming to DbD, but in the end Lara Croft was only another survivor wearing normal clothes, doesn't affect the game's identity like a non-horror licensed killer would. The horror of each DbD match, or at least horror theme, comes partially from the map and mechanics like bleeding, screaming and stuff envolving the entity, but mainly from the killers. Adding a Star Wars villain with a lightsaber would completely go against that. A Star Wars killer AND a map would be even more damaging.
-
@thrive2survive said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3940391#Comment_3940391
I see DBD being far more niche than Fortnite as all the more reason to add characters from Star Wars.
Why? In DbD's case, the game works because it's niche, it appels to the public it aims for. A license outside that niche would only make it less appealing while not adding any reason to atract a broader public, because DbD's gameplay and identity already don't appeal to them.
-
@Rapid99 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3940374#Comment_3940374
You could scratch horror from dbd years ago because there's literally nothing horror about it outside of having horror movie characters in it.
Hell, Vader is more horror than Trickster or Skull Merchant.
because there's literally nothing horror about it outside of having horror movie characters in it.
That is simply not true. The entire lore about the entity and DbD's world is cosmic horror, and the entity manifests in gameplay too. Also, the maps are horror-themed, survivors scream in terror and leave trails of blood, and even basic elements from the game, like generators and hooks, are inspired by The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. The design of original killers is very horror-themed as well, some more than others.
Hell, Vader is more horror than Trickster or Skull Merchant.
No, he isn't. Trickster is literally based on one reallly old and common horror trope, all the way back from Psycho. You may not like his design, I'm not a fan either, but saying it's not horror is simply not true. By the way, the Skull Merchant is based on the same trope, she is just more poorly designed in that regard (because the Trickster still communicates much better the idea of a psychopath with narcisistic traits that enjoys killing), but still shows at least atempts to lean into horror with the skulls that were emphasized so much when she was teased. Either way, the backlash her design received and the praises Unknown's got should already make clear enough that designs that fail to look scary should be avoided. A Star Wars licensed killer would be worst than a character "that doesn't look scary enough", and the problems would go far beyond a bad design, it would be straight up a character already known to be from another genre and have nothing to do with horror, with no horror elements whatsoever, from an IP that is not even remotely close to horror occupying the role that should belong to a horror-themed killer and open a precedent to add other non-horror chapters as well. It would straight up mean the game moving away from horror.
-
As a customer, whatever helps that business grow and evolve helps me in the long run.
And a Star Wars license wouldn't do that, not to this particular game. It wouldn't atract many new players because Star Wars fans who want related games are playing actual Star Wars games like Battlefront II and Old Republic. None of them would be insterested on playing as Darth Vader only to chase survivors around pallets near a barn and then place them in hooks. It is not the kind of playstile that appeals to that fanbase.
but if franchise characters are added to the game that some players don't like, most of those people will be upset but continue to play the game anyway.
Good thing that even you said "most", but not "all". It still has the risk of driving players away from the game, but not a lot of potential of bringing new players. Players that disliked it but stayed would also not want to buy characters and skins for it, and it would also make the game less appealing to horror fans that could start playing it, because it would be moving away from horror and looking less like an horror game. So, it could drive away potential new players.
And to those saying "DBD is becoming like fortnite!" My reaction to that would be, "Oh, you mean dbd is becoming more like a massively popular game that lots of people like and play, that shows zero signs of shutting down anytime soon? Don't threaten me with a good time."
For someone who wants to look at it like a business, you are missing a very important part of the subject: the target market and the target audience. Fortnite didn't become famous because of it's licenses, it had already become one of the most popular games in the world years before its first license came out, and they worked because the game's public was very broad, and not many things could ruin its visual identity because it was a funny and cartoonish-looking game that still looks funny and cartoonish with all the random characters from it carrying guns that wouldn't even fit them, it's the same reason why Rick and Morty didn't lose its identity with all the references to many different movies like Frankenstein, Nightmare on Elm Street, Predator and Total Recall. Fortnite was also more famous because of its gameplay than its visual identity.
DbD, on the other hand, is far more niche, it has a unique gameplay that doesn't appeal to everyone, it appeals to people that enjoy such unique playstile and horror fans, and the game's identity is REALLY important for this appeal to work. it wouldn't suddenly become popular like Fortnite if it started adding any license like Fornite does, but it would still atract the kind of criticism Fortnite receives from people who don't play it while also alienating people who like DbD for it's horror-themed identity.
Also, what's with this "Don't threaten me with a good time" talk? Even if BHVR somehow profited from something like this, YOU wouldn't be the one getting the money. That's why we usually don't talk about things we like from a business standpoint, it makes for sense to ask for what WE want in something we spent time and money with, not what we think it would fill the pockets of someone else a little further, that's not within our interests. There's a reason why "souless cash grab" became such a negative word even though adquiring more money is good for the company doing it (and what drives a capitalist economy to begin with).
-
If Darth Vader ever comes to DbD, then you can scratch the word "horror" from the game for good. He does NOT fit the game at all and nothing can change that. Not only is Star Wars FAR from horror (as much as I Iike it, it's a fantasy/sci-fi mix made mainly for kids. George Lucas himself said it was made for children), Darth Vader's whole design and theme have nothing to do with horror either. In the case of Demogorgon, Dracula amd Vecna, at least the characters were horror-inspired monsters. Stranger Things and Castlevania still have horror elements and references and D&D literally has instructions on how to make horror campaigns, while the closest thing to a horror element Star Wars ever had was a werewolf mask George Lucas REMOVED from the original movie because he thought it didn't fit, it can't even be seen in legally available versions today.
"But he scary,". He is feared in SW because he is the most famous enforcer of a cruel fascist dictatorship, not because of horror elements in his own character. If being feared and wearing black are all it takes to become a licensed killer, then might as well add Don Corleone, Venom, Agent Smith, The Batman Who Laughs, Hans Landa and the Man in Black from Westworld to the game. Just don't complain if it ends up looking like Fortnite.
"But that Rogue One scene…" ONE scene of a character approaching in the dark doesn't mean they fit into horror. Superman has a similar scene in Superman vs The Elite where he scares the villains like that and Batman does it all the time. And there are versions of them that kill. Does anybody think they would fit into the game? Ghostfreak from Ben 10 and the Man in Black from Westworld (literally the scene that introduces him) have some scene where they look somewhat scary too. Does anybody think they would fit into the game?
If they were to add to the game stuff from a franchise for kids, Goosebumps is right there, it's horror. And if anyone thinks a Star Wars license would bring many new players to the game, think again. Star Wars fans who want related games are playing actual Star Wars games like Battlefront II and Old Republic. None of them would be insterested on playing as Darth Vader only to chase survivors around pallets near a barn and then place them in hooks. It is not the kind of playstile that appeals to that fanbase. It would only make the game less appealing for horror fans.
-
Also, let's not forget that the Huntress' power was already kind of recycled into two other killers. Both the Deathslinger and the Trickster already felt like a Huntress with extra steps… and as if that wasn't enough, now we have a killer that looks like a Huntress with only one hatchet. And while Deathslinger's at least feels like a different kind of ranged attack that has a very similar function, Springtrap's axe throws looks way too much like a Huntress hatchet throw. The area of effect created around the axe and the ability to pick it up again are nice and at least they add something different, but aren't enough to stop this ability from looking like the Huntress' power inserted on another killer.
-
Honestly, as much as I want to see a spider-monster killer, I'm glad the next one is not a jorogumo.
DbD has three chapters based on japanese culture already, plus an entire skin line about it and even the Skull Merchant has japanese roots. As cool as japanese folklore is, there are other cultures and folklores in asia to be explored in the game.
-
@terumisan said:
the humanoid ones are more likely than full spider
Even more likely to trigger the phobia, you mean?
-
@Mooks said:
it cant be generalized like that. Some people that are suffering from arachnophobia may not be affected by any depictions on a monitor at all, for some others its just the movements of a spider.
One way to make it happen would still be to make a neutral cosmetic that would be shown client wider to those that have the optional option turned on. We could get a cool Spider Killer and plenty of cosmetics and wouldnt even notice if someone Else has the option turned on - so not immersion breaking at all.
Somehow people still have something against this idea 🤷♂️
I'm fine with that option, but considering how long it usually takes for acessibility options to be implemented in this game (I mean, we are getting brightness settings NOW, 9 years after the game's release), can we imagine how long that would take? Would the devs even WANT to make an entire new feature only for the release of one killer? Or would they just decide to do a completely different killer instead because that would be too much extra work?
-
@Marc_123 said:
Some feedback that is on my mind. Thanks.
The item and perk colour change is bad. Adds nothing to the game and makes it worse. A toggle would be fine if you don´t want to change it completely back.
Chase music is to loud. Especially since for whatever reason almost all of them now have a very short hammering drum- oder percussion-loop. A slider to make it even a little less loud would be great.
Why the heck can´t we get our NEXT and PREVIOUS buttons back to cycle through chars in the menu. You need much more clicks than before to go through them now. Still feels clunky.
Please consider something different than "Quests". This is so incredible generic and boring. DbD don´t need to copy every other game. Why take some cool mystery out of the game?
As someone who is actually very sensible to loud noises and is still not sure if that's due to autism or not (I wasn't diagnosed. At least not yet, but heard profesionals say I have quite a few traits), the most triggering noise in the game is the "generator completed" sound effect. It's loud, high-pitched and reminds me of the ringing of a bell. I hurts to hear those even when I'm playing survivor and already know when it's going to pop.
-
Honestly, as much as acessibility is important, not wanting to add specific horrifying stuff because of phobias would a bit too much. The main point of horror is to be disturbing in some way and the entire genre is already full of stuff that can cause different forms of phobia. A "phobia" is an intense irrational fear or aversion to something, and horror is entirely based on things that can cause fear. It's no coincidence the game itself already has at least two perks and one achievement with the names of REAL PHOBIAS (coulrophobia, thanatophobia, hemophobia).
Hell, if DbD was really commited to avoid phobia-inducing things, then we wouldn't have the Clown, the Plague, and maybe not even the Dredge. Let's just list a few things in the game that are related to phobias. I understand that most of them are less common, but let's just be reminded how, when it comes to horror, almost everything can be related to some phobia:
Coulrophobia (clowns): there's a clown killer with literally a perk with that name.
Emetophobia (vomitting or seeing others vomit): the Plague (one thing must be pointed out tho, the devs once put a question in a poll about how much her power would impact each players' gameplay experience… but they did so AFTER she had already released and nothing was done about it to this day).
Scotophobia (darkness): the Macmillan State maps used to be quite dark, and now we have the Dredge. I don't know if Nightfall could trigger scotophobia or nyctophobia on people, but I wouldn't be surprised.
Chiroptophobia (bats): Dracula can turn into a small swarm of them, making bat screeches and all.
Hemophobia (blood): there's even an achievement with this name, and even though it's not .
Necrophobia (corpses and things related to death): well, this one is really unavoidable.
Hell, if you want to really go far, there's even Cynophobia (fear of dogs), which is surprisingly common and affects a similar percentage of the world population to aracnophobia, and DbD creates a scenario where a dog is chasing the survivors, biting them, and even attacking them on the ground.
Either way, if we want to give a more constructive feedback here, I believe it should be easier to put spider-related content in the game in a more accessible what it was done to the Clown or the Plague: just make a spider-like being that doesnt'really have the shape of a spider. Come on, that's literally already in the game: the entity's legs coming out of the hook, the Hag's "Black Widow" skin, and even the facehuggers on Nostromo. Facehuggers were always a bit spider-like, but I never heard of them triggering anyone's aracnophobia in either the movies or games. Buuuut of course, I cannot speak for arachnophobes because I am not one. So you know what? I'm going to make another thread asking people about what people would think about a humanoid-ish spider-like killer. Hold on.
-
@LockerLurk said:
My favorite small details:
- Ghostface's little chuckle after he does the jumpscare motion in the lobby, the way his shoulders kinda shake with laughter. Bro's having the time of his life in the Fog.
- The way Dredge schlurps out of its own shadows when it spawns into the lobby or the map.
- Both Wesker and Nemesis have the same little tentacle animation and pose when spawning in.
- The way Survivors' faces subtly change in intensity with every tier of Madness against Doctor.
- The little spiders on Toba Landing, they're super cute. :3
- The Unknown changing to a male or female voice depending on what head you have equipped, and the fact that under UVX the voice sounds like a normal human voice - not garbled.
- Any of the still props in a map that turn to look at you - the Yamaoka statues, the knights in Vecna's map, the Animatronics in the FNAF map.
- Dracula's castle appearing on maps you face him on, as long as the map is not licensed.
- The weird stringy bits on the planet that look like a web in the Nostromo Skybox.
- The ######### BEAUTIFUL skies on Dead Dawg, Toba Landing, and Nostromo Wreckage.
- The way the hooks gently sway a bit on their axis.
- The fact you can power up the Greenville Main gen and it shows a film clip.
- Any map with a jumpscare, any of them. Super cool detail and super fun.
The Unknown's voice sounding more human under UVX is a really awesome detail. Easily one of my favorites.
-
It's good to point out that T1 Myers can trigger chases but can't gain bloodlust… or at least I believe it still can't. He couldn't for years, I don't know if they added that when he was buffed.
So chase doesn't necessarily means you can get Bloodlust. Not that Viktor needs it, honestly. Speed definitively isn't a problem for him.
-
The ONLY thing good about this awkward color change was fixing Freddy's blue dress and green dress… but now the problem remains…
-
When it comes to fun, I think both licensed and non-licensed killers have potential, but licensed ones tend to have more unique or creative powers.
@Star99er said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3933767#Comment_3933767
I often feel like their powers and play styles are often made unique to better suit the character in question when introducing a licensed character.
Yeah, I agree 100% with this. Lots of original killers have really unique powers, like Singularity, Twins and Dredge, but just look at the licensed ones: I don't think the devs would have ever created those underground tunnels for a power if it wasnt'for Xenomorph, or a really small third person killer if it wasn't Chucky, or alternate ways of killing the survivors if it wasn't for Pig and Sadako. Not to mention Pinhead, one of the most unique killers in the game! Even when a killer's main ability is a bit redundant to another's, like Nemesis' tentacle feeling like a weaker Pyramid Head Punishment, they still come with something unique, like the zombies! And is far less common for then to have bland, redundant or boring powers.
On the other hand, I must say I tend to like far more the character design of original killers. One of the things I like the most about DbD is how creative their killer concepts are and how good their visual and sound design tend to be. Some licensed killers are greatly-designed horror legends like Xenomorph, Pyramid Head and Pinhead, but others, although they may be good on their respective stories and franchises, don't look as scary in DbD in comparison to other killers in the game, like Wesker, Kaneki and Springtrap.
-
Well, I think it IS going to work. Two things to point out here:
- About the luck offerings… I don't think people will use them all the time just to be able to go next and I believe the prevention will still reduce going next considerably even with them, but I do think some will want to abuse it, and that's why I think the best course of action would be to completely remove luck offerings, rework Up the Ante and buff Slippery Meat accordingly. Normally, no one even uses these stuff today if not to combine them with sloppy butcher anyway, why bring luck offerings if you're not planning on taking the chance while hooked? Sloppy I think it might be fine then because people would have to sacrifice 25% of their build for that, which is quite unlikely. I won't have a problem with the perk being reworked, tho.
- About trolling after being unhooked, what a lot of people seem to ignore is that, unlike giving up on hook, that takes TIME, EFFORT and risks a BAN. Going next isn't so common just because some survivors gave up easily, it became common because the game has a mechanic that allows them to do it almost instantly, just by pressing M1 3 times and letting go, and for free with no risk of ban. With that being gone, going next will become less common.
No one can get banned for giving up on hook, but they can get banned for working with the killer or refuse to participate in normal gameplay, just like any other game, and now there will be even a new system detecting if someone is trying to go next, which will help against this.
Trolling and atracting the killer's attention to get killed as soon as possible also takes more than just pressing M1 3 times and letting go, and doesn't garantee the killer will sacrifice them. If they go around dropping pallets, vault-spamming, pointing at the hook, whatever they are doing, as simple and repetitive it can be, it is still more effort than just pressing M1 or going for the leave button, so most Go-Nexters will realize it's a risky waste of time and just press the "Leave Match" button instead, which gives them the penalty and leaves a bot behind, which is far better than having one survivor less.
And finaly, it takes time. Let's not forget, we call it "Go Next" because people doing it are trying to GO to the NEXT match AS QUICK AS POSSIBLE, not having to stay for a full game. The only reason they did it with hook give-ups instead of DCing was to avoid taking a time penalty that prevented from joining another match. Well, if they stay on the match trolling, they STILL aren't going to the next match. And considering how early people try to DC sometimes and how long games can take, that would often take MORE time than the DC penalty would. That already disincentivizes it.
Finally, I must say that people choosing to DC instead of insisting on trolling is something that ALREADY HAPPENS too! Yeah, trolling apter failing to go next is a thing that sometimes happens, but multiple times I've also seen (while playing both as killer and survivor) survivors DC when they fail to give up on hook, leaving a bot behind. I have also seen survivors try to give up on hook, but being rescued on second stage, and still playing normally for a long time until the killers get them a second time. And finally, one thing that I've even described on another thread before, there was a match recently where I refused again and again to kill a survivor that tried to give up on hook but got rescued before she could. At some point, she just started doing gens and working towards the objective. In the end, it was a long and pretty good close match, and a survivor even made a positive comment about it in the end. For me, that was enough to know it was worth it. If that survivor had succeeded to give up on hook, it would just have been just an awful match where survivors got destroyed with no chance to fight back and hated it.
-
@camping_site said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3933845#Comment_3933845
At least you didn’t try to defend that nonsense and went for the Strawman. There is a hope for everyone.
Defend against what? You tried no argument against what I said and just went for a fallacy based on downvotes, so I just responded to that and called it out. If no point was made against it and no atempt to dismantle it was made, there's nothing to defend against, because my point still stands.
If you think it's "nonsense", try to explain why then. Don't you just flip the board and claim to win.
-
@camping_site said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3933273#Comment_3933273
I’m affraid I can’t follow your logic. And the downvotes could indicate there isn’t any.
Because what indicates if something is right or wrong is the number of people disagreeing with it, specially if it's 4 people on a thread where some are coming out as ragequitters who are angry because it won't be so easy to grief other survivors anymore.
IIf you're going to bring up a fallacy, at least try a more convincing one.