Marigoria
Marigoria
About
- Username
- Marigoria
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@GentlemanFridge said:
None? Why would one perk becoming basekit warrant another for the other side becoming basekit as well?
Exactly what I was thinking. BT basekit would be to prevent camping, not to give anyone an advantage. It would be a bandaid fix.
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2930867#Comment_2930867
Not in a video game it isn't.
How is it not? By adding LGBT characters to media you're normalizing being LGBT, which is what should happen, because it is normal and shouldn't be treated differently.
-
@sulaiman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931133#Comment_2931133
Ok, maybe i missunderstand this, but how is it not a political ideology?
Dont get me wrong, to be LGBT is just how people are, BUT the LGBTQ+-movement? It tries to push legislation for equal right, against discrimination and acts of hate, as well as trying to define what it is. And where hate and discrimination begins and end is a matter of ideology (at least as how i understand that term as a non-native speaker), and taking influence on legislation is a political act, is it not?
If thats not a political ideology, what is it then?
Is someone being straight a political ideology? No. Same thing with being gay/bi/trans
-
@Brokenbones said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931912#Comment_2931912
One of the community managers talked about how he (and I'm sure many of his colleagues) wouldn't have felt right about the first lgbt character being locked behind a DLC that you're expected to pay for
If anything that would just make it look like BHVR is trying to just profit off of the whole thing, instead of actually giving a damn about it
Whether you like the decision they made or not, at least it's not something they expect you to pay for. Hell, one thing I respect BHVR for is making the pride charms optional. You can just not redeem them if you're not interested, despite some people crying about it being ""forced"""
They could have made that DLC and donate a % of what they made with it to an LGBT organization. Also technically you can still get the character with shards since it's original.
-
Not that rare. Rare for me would be Hag and Freddy
-
@Phasmamain said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931722#Comment_2931722
Honestly I don’t mind it but it’s probably because I’m used to it. If anything I found ash’s breathing more annoying especially when running.
But yeah they should probably reduce the volume of his grunts and breathing but do they actually care about Jeff?
Ash, Elodie and Yun Jin are so annoying I just refuse to play them.
-
@ReverseVelocity said:
You are a coward. I want a perk that makes your character louder so I can run it exclusively on Ash and Jeff.
Not a coward, I just feel like just by listening to him I'm the one who's about to have an heart attack next. He could be louder than demo for all i care
-
@Phasmamain said:
Part of playing Jeff is asserting your dominance to the killer by being louder than them.
That's not even the problem, it's just so tiring to hear it when playing.
-
Useless like 80% of perks.
-
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
Every Devotion level increases your Bloodpoint gain by 10%, aswell increasing your Bloodpoint cap by 32k
As much as I hate the grind, I dont think that would be a great idea.
I'm devotion 24 so my bloodpoint gains would be at 240%. New players need the grind reduced the most imo.
-
@Barbarossa2020 said:
Can we have some socialist representation as well?
Socialism is a political ideology. LGBT is not.
-
I think the problem is that since legion just got reworked you see a lot of them and it's easier to focus on just how annoying and boring legion is to go against even though it was already before.
-
You got a 2k as a crap tier killer and you still crying.....
-
Do you have a screenshot with the perk loadout from that match as well? Since you mentioned it but only showed the chat, both should be on the same screenshot no?
As from the transphobic comments, just report them for that.
-
Just went against a Billy who got a 3k. So no, not impossible.
-
@WesCravenFan said:
I just wish people would end the game.
If you find the hatch, jump in. Do not stand there and wait for the killer to find you.
If you are at the exit gates, just leave. Do not spam fast vault animations near the exit gate trying to get the killer's attention.
If you are the killer, hook the last guy. Don't stand over him staring at him.
This. As much as other things can be annoying, I HATE people who waste my time. Kill me/escape and let me go to the next one.
-
@Tostapane said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/321512/lgbtism-either-cant-be-illness-or-phobic
imo the main mistake of behavior on that thing was starting to add those kind of things in a game ABOUT KILLING PEOPLE/ESCAPING FROM THE KILLER in the 1st place... no one should cared about it because it's not relevant to the game... if you want that a certain character likes specific kind of people (gay, lesbian, trans, etc etc) they could simply let the people imagine what they want to be of said character...
Imagination should have been the way to go, but that was thrown out the window when they started talking about straight relationships.
-
LGBTism?
-
Now he is not only still weak, he is also boring to go against.
-
As a solo player, can you give me a single reason to stay on that hook? Only thing I'd "win" would be a couple good pats on the back from people I probably won't ever see again in my life.
In terms of in game things that I can actually WIN, what will I get? My team mates escaping gives me no bp, me staying on hook gives me no bp because I cant do anything, not even get distraction points.
So with all this in mind, why should I stay on that hook?
-
@oxygen said:
I agree 100%. Also opens for the possibility of giving him and Charlotte different chase tunes, which would be pretty cool.
Victor doesn't have any chase music though, do you think he should get one?
-
@Dionysus42 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2929429#Comment_2929429
If they had to jump into a locker to avoid it, that means the Killer had already earned the kill by chasing them into an unwinnable situation. LMAO imagine being this entitled. Just take the L and get moried.
The killer only earns the kill when he gets the kill. If the survivor used a counter to a insta death addon that costs only 7k bloodpoints and it's not even that rare, I don't see why the killer still feels entitled when the survivor uses a counter for that.
-
@NekoGamerX said:
slugging part of the game just like campping and tunneling they never handed out penalties for it
but sure were see more bandade fix in the form of useless perks
Slugging someone for 4 minutes instead of hooking them because you want to waste their time to be petty shouldnt be part of the game, like when before EGC staying at the gate for minutes waiting for the killer wasn't supposed to be part of the game either.
At least let survivors have a give up button so they can move on to the next game.
-
All the Bills I get in mine go down super fast and farm you off the hook without BT.... Which is his perk. Sad.
-
@adam1233467 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2927805#Comment_2927805
Why this perk will be strong in a swf?
Just one person brings it so everyone can heal, since it's way easier since they can communicate in a SWF.
-
@DBD_Pinhead said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2927830#Comment_2927830
Maybe on PC with full optimization. If you believe that about console you have to be the most delusional, surv minded person to complain about getting downed. Unless you bunched up like ants in one spot to get 3 of the 4 on your team downed, you had nothing to worry about. If you got mind gamed and got hit that was on you.
Games shouldnt stay bad on pc just to make people on console happy.
-
Just aim better.
-
@DBD_Pinhead said:
Because survs wanted to cry because they got hit once, like she had OP addons in the first place, the devs caved and nerfed her like they do all killers.
Old iri head was OP and you have to be delusional or incredible biased to think it was not.
-
Letha Pursuer does not need to be basekit. Corrupt Intervention, sure.
If you want to kick gens faster use brutal strength.
Sure, I don't see why not.
-
@MalevolentSadist said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2927744#Comment_2927744
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2927744#Comment_2927744
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2927744#Comment_2927744
Yes, survivors complaining about it. The topic is Dead Hard not Ruin. Perhaps, you could say something useful instead of focusing in on the remake I made about Ruin.
Was more useful than your entire post so far. At least don't spread misinformation.
-
@adam1233467 said:
COH will never be balanced, this perk design is bad I dont know hog this perk was approved in the first place, if they jus remove the self heal from this perk, may be balanced, but reducing the heal bonus is the wrong way
Useless and solo Q and still good in SWF. amazing idea just what we needed.
-
@Carth said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2927317#Comment_2927317
last gen pops,
survivor team has 4X BT, 4X DH, 4X DS.
Didn't tunnel and got 8 hooks spread evenly on survivors(aka everyone is on death hook)
have one survivor on hook, It is impossible for you to secure the kill or down another survivor unless 1. they're bad. 2. You're playing an instant down killer.
You can slug and wait for the timer to run out.
-
@Nathan13 said:
I’m sorry this happened, it’s always frustrating when there’s party streamers but the game goes bad.
99% of the time with party streamers, that's why I just hoard all of mine.
-
@Hanzo_Hasashi7 said:
DH-DS-
these 2 can wreck your game in no time
had a match recently all of the survs had the whole pack
2/4 tho but still it was unfun
DS is only an issue if you tunnel.
-
A flag charm and having one character be gay in the lore doesn't make it an LGBT game, since none of the game is focused on any LGBT aspects.
-
@Chocolate_Cosmos said:
If we will start getting weekly events (bloodpoints, exp, rift fragments), that would be very cool. Keep it up guys, please!
Yes please I want more rift fragments so it isn't so grindy. An extra tome like they did for halloween last year would be neat.
-
Razer Kraken for me. Comfortable and sound great.
-
People who make this type of threads are the real losers.
Let people use whatever perks they want as long as they aren't cheating idc
-
Stop the backpacks to nea, feng and dwight. I want Jeff with a backpack...
-
@_ZZlaya_ said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925662#Comment_2925662
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/ELB29EWTONO6/image.png
If I have LGBT friends and family members with which I communicate very good exactly means I am not prejudiced.
You know, homophobia cannot work on some people and don't work on other ones
You can accept someone who is gay because they are your friend and still be homophobic. A good example of this would be someone having a gay friend and still using the F slur against other gay people just because they don't like them.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925551#Comment_2925551
Okay, in brief:
- I'm not saying I'm a doctor. But I am saying that I do have qualifications in psychology and have a pretty robust understanding of the domain.
- Yes, we're talking on the internet, on a videogame forum - which is why I didn't want to get into current IRL controversies like the 'DSG' bill. I'm happy to argue that one if you want, but let's do it in Off Topic or something, or maybe a different forum completely. We're already OT, and it's going to be a discussion that might (see: almost certainly will) upset people, and it's not one that I can really have while treading on eggshells.
- Anything that starts with 'my personal experiences' is anecdotal evidence. That's...what it means. Personal experiential evidence rather than something data based.
- ...What? No, that was never the 'predators' argument (and I'm pretty sure that there has never been a 'gay bathroom' debate either). The original one was more a really nasty attempt to paint homosexuals as pederasts. The current one is completely different and comes down to pragmatism.
- No, this isn't a 'rights' thing either. It's about accommodations and the nature of identity, probably best parsed as 'balancing accommodating transgender people within society against pragmatic concerns about fairness and bad actors'. Rights don't really come into it, because 'Rights' are a legalistic, generally constitutional issue rather than a social one.
And again, I'm happy to continue this one (later) but let's move it somewhere else - I'm sure the mods are already giving this thread the hairy eyeball.
Well thankfully, people who also have qualifications in psychology and psychiatry do not agree with you, that is why the DSM exists.
We're talking on the internet about real life issues, yes. Small things like having companies recognize LGBT people and include, helps normalize LGBT people, making it easier for LGBT people to get acceptance, which is visible in real life situations.
I remove my experience, since my experience about transgender people, as a transgender person, is less important than the videos you linked, apparently, but if you're going to ignore the rest of that sentence, where I mentioned real life transgender people circles, that is ok, too. :)
Yes, there were arguments also made against gay/lesbian people in terms of bathrooms. Gay men used to be accused of being groomers and conservatives did not want them in bathrooms with children, which is again one of the fear mongering tactics used against transgender people.
This is absolutely about rights, even about the most basic right of simply being and existing. "Pragmatic concerns about fairness and bad actors", again, where are the stats for those? Transgender people have a way higher risk of being sexually/physically assaulted than cisgender people. Should cisgender people be banned from bathrooms? I don't think so.
Here are some legislations pretending to anti LGBT and anti transgender in specific laws just in the US:
https://freedomforallamericans.org/legislative-tracker/anti-transgender-legislation/
-
@GentlemanFridge said:
The quadruple DC. That I have never seen before.
Old iri hatchets. Enough said.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925496#Comment_2925496
I could, naturally. Which is why I didn't say 'at large' or 'the majority', because I don't think either of us could prove that one either way :)
We are talking about the internet here - as we are on a videogame forum. But I am also a former academic (and am married to a current academic) - and there is plenty of this discourse at universities too.
And yes - what you just said is the literal definition of anecdotal evidence. 'My personal experiences, therefore x'. Which is fine, because there isn't really that much actual data on this one. But your anecdotal evidence is still anecdotal evidence, much like mine. Although you seem to be coming from more of a 'man on the street' approach, while mine is mostly online and in academic circles.
It's not that I disagree with the DSM 5, it's that the DSM 5 is quite complicated as, unlike previous editions, the DSM 5 is designed to be constantly changing.
While I'm not a practicing psychologist, that is the area where my qualifications lie (well, criminology and clinical psychology, I'm an educator by trade) - and I can tell you that 'psychology' and 'science' are not always compatible domains. It really depends whether you go for more of a Jungian or Freudian deconstructivist/psychoanalytic approach, or something a bit more pragmatic like Klein. But again, a different discussion - I can talk psych literally all day, but we've already gone OT.
Regarding the predator thing, it's a bit different as one came from an attempt to demonize homosexuals and the other is a pragmatic concern about bad actors taking advantage based on the concessions being asked for.
Let's not make this into a left versus right thing, because this isn't a partisan issue. By 'current bill', I'm assuming you're talking about the DSG storm in a teacup?
Being an academic is like saying you have a gender studies degree. You're still not a doctor.
We're talking on the internet, while real life bills against transgender rights are being purposed by real life governments. Transgender rights are not just some quirky internet thing.
My personal experience while surrounded by other people who are also transgender is not anecdotal evidence.
And no, the predator argument isnt different. Gay people used to be accused of faking being gay just to go to bathrooms and to prey on other people. Same thing is happening now with transgender people and that also includes prison/jail.
You are right, this is not a left vs right issue, this is a people who want rights vs people who don't want others to have rights. And from your talking points, which come from a conservative view, I'm not too inclined to assume you are pro the former.
It can be seen as a storm in a teacup when the bills don't affect you in any way yes.
-
I would love this to try new killers and maybe new builds, but that is about it.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925450#Comment_2925450
Yes, they have. Because it's only recently that we've started separating out the social aspects of gender identity from the biological aspects in any sort of formal way. Even medical professionals have, until recently, used man/woman as a shorthand for male/female.
I never said 'at large'. But this does illustrate what I was alluding to - modern progressive activist bases lack orthodoxy, and will thus often believe different, at times contradictory things. It's why a lot of companies are just staying out of it - because a base without orthodoxy is impossible to please, as satisfying one part of the base will tick off another part. Just look at the stuff around Batwoman or Cyberpunk for some good examples.
That said - you saying 'loud minority' is just as anecdotal :) I don't think anyone has done a survey or poll here.
Yes, dysphoria is absolutely a contentious term, with some activists likening including it as a disorder to previous DSMs including homosexuality as a disorder. Here's a good example of the arguments being presented (it also contains some links to other articles on the topic).
https://psmag.com/social-justice/take-gender-identity-disorder-dsm-68308
I completely disagree with it - but I do understand the arguments. And the DSM 5 is...oh man, that's another discussion for another time.
I'm not sure what argument the OP was making, I'm just trying to explain the general thrust of the 'predator' argument because it's so frequently strawmanned as 'trans people are predators'.
It's not at large, no, and which makes me think why did you not show sources of transgender people saying the exact opposite of the ones you linked?
I'm not sure if you are cisgender or not, but I'm going to assume you are, so I'm sure you are not used to hanging out with transgender people, specially transgender circles in real life outside of the internet, so I'm sure you'd easily see things that get loud because it's what conservatives like to boost up, for their own narrative about transgender people. They did the same with gay people before, this is just recycled talking points because they feel like gay people are accepted enough that their bigotry just won't slid so easily anymore, so they decided to go to the next marginalized group.
Being part of trans groups irl, knowing what most trans people think, is not anecdotal evidence. I'm sure me, as a transgender person, would know way more about transgender issues than someone who is not, not only by my personal experiences, but by the people that I know that have a similar life path as me.
You disagree with the DSM-5, which brings again that neither you or I are doctors. DSM-5 is made by doctors, and I'd rather side with science on this one. Again, something that conservatives seem to not be big fans of.
The predator argument was also used on gay people in the past, and now is being used against trans people. If you are not aware, please do a bit of research about current bills being purposed by republicans on the topic, I'm sure there are a lot of them, and you'll notice that is once again, mostly made of fear mongering.
-
Depends entirely not only on others but me.
If my layout was already done and I didn't change ideas, I usually ready up as soon as I get into a lobby.
As for the others taking longer or not, I have no idea.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925409#Comment_2925409
Yes, trans people (or rather activists) absolutely think that. I can link you to dozens of articles and videos on the topic.
https://growinguptransgender.com/2018/11/01/biological-sex-is-a-social-construct/
https://scatter.wordpress.com/2022/01/30/sex-as-a-social-construct/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2020/06/15/the-myth-of-biological-sex/?sh=6d1c8b8b76b9
https://everydayfeminism.com/2017/02/trans-women-not-biologically-male/
It generally comes down to post-modern confusion, in that just because we assign words to a thing doesn't mean that it lacks objective existence independent of these words.
Even the term 'dysphoria' is contentious now, as per the 'my identity is NOT a disorder!' discourse.
The problem is that 'man' and 'woman' have been classically used to refer to both biological and social identities - creating confusion when people separate them out.
A lot of people misunderstand the 'predators' argument too. It's not a matter of 'trans people are predators' and more along the lines of 'all people are potential predators, and thus we have to ensure that bad actors can't abuse the accommodations we make for trans people'.
No, woman and man have not been used in a biological sense. When you go to the doctor it says F or M, not W or M.
Again, anecdotal evidence. A loud minority is not evidence of transgender people at large thinking that.
And dysphoria is not a contentious term. It has a section on the DSM-5, I'm sure doctors have more expertise on the topic than both of us, or anyone else who is not in the field for that matter.
No, there is no misunderstanding about the predator argument. What the OP was implying was that transgender women go to women prisons to impregnate women.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925338#Comment_2925338
Okay, please take this as charitably as possible - this topic is a sodding minefield even on open forums, but I'll see if I can explain the other side of the argument here (while trying to tread...carefully).
- This comes down to semantic confusion due to the way we've classically used these terms.
- 'Male and female' versus 'man and woman'...a lot of people use these terms interchangeably, where they refer to both biology and identity. When it comes to trans stuff, these two get separated out - with male and female being biological descriptors and man and women being social descriptors.
- The problem arises where people start doing both at the same time (where in one context these meanings are separated and in another they are synonymous), and I think this is where you're making your mistake.
- Biologically, there is very clearly 'male' and 'female', we can see this at a chromosomal and neurochemical level. Whether chromosomal disorders constitute their own category...that's a very complicated and very different discussion.
- It's completely fine to say 'I identify as x', but it's a bit different to say 'I am x at a biological level'. 'Biological sex is a social construct' is fringe thinking even within progressive circles.
- There is nothing 'phobic' about separating these things out. You can ask people to respect your identity, but you cannot force them to ignore biology - and if you do, you start getting into very weird Veronica Ivy territory.
When we get down to sports, prisons, dating and the like, it gets even more complicated, and this is a contentious topic within even the most progressive circles, with it coming down to post-modernist thinking (there is no such thing as objective biological reality, therefore biology is a social construct and can be changed at will) and more pragmatic thinking.
I'm not saying that either side is completely right or wrong, but there is absolutely multiple sides to this issue and labelling the other sides as 'transphobic' isn't useful.
You lost me at "Biological sex is a social construct". No trans person thinks that, otherwise we would not transition medically in the first place. We are well aware of biological sex and it's differences, that's where our dysphoria comes from. A small loud minority twitter saying biological sex is socially constructed, is not a general sentiment, far from it.
There is a lot of phobic in calling a trans woman a man, which was exactly what that person did. Like I mentioned in my post, man and woman are not biological terms, they are identities, and those yes, are socially constructed. And keep it in mind that something being social constructed doesn't mean they don't exist. Languages are socially constructed and they do exist. Female and male are biological.
They also implied with their post that trans women want to go to women prisons to make other women pregnant, which implies that trans people are predators.
-
@bm33 said:
Before I read the post when I read the title of more flags I thought it'd be funny if they added red flag charms.
The specific flags are basically same design just recolored right? If they can put out 4 or 5 recolors of the same charm on a single rift I would think doing same for flags for representation would be just as easy and more meaningful.
I mean with the quantity of charms we have right now and so many just being recolors, I don't see why they could not add random color flags too, at least they are more visible than those bronze ones
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925318#Comment_2925318
I'd be wary labelling this stuff as 'transphobic', as the biological reality of transgenderism is a contentious topic even within progressive circles.
If you disagree - then disagree. Put your reasoning into text and post it, then be ready to defend it.
Calling people names is counterproductive.
I'm trans, and saying a trans woman has a man body is transphobic. If we want to focus on biologically, there is no woman or man, there is male and female, and I speak for myself, but I'm totally aware of my biology. When I go to the doctor as a trans man, I'm aware that I'm biologically female, but I am not "woman bodied". Calling a trans woman a man is not biologically accurate, since again, it's not based on biology.
Implying trans women being put in women prisons will lead to high rises of pregnancy is statistically incorrect and made with anecdotal evidence.