MegaWaffle
MegaWaffle
About
- Username
- MegaWaffle
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,181
- Last Active
Comments
-
@thesuicidefox said:
https://gameclips.io/thesuicidefox/186e6750-bd3a-4b50-8515-349b225669a7
Hit me with your best shot.
How video streaming works on the web: An introduction
The need for a native video API
From the early to late 2000s, video playback on the web mostly relied on the flash plugin.
Screen warning that the user should install the flash plugin, at the place of a video
This was because, at the time, there was no other mean to stream video on a browser. As a user, you had the choice between either installing third-party plugins like flash or Silverlight, or not being able to play any video at all.
To fill that hole, the WHATWG began to work on a new version of the HTML standard including, among other things, video and audio playback natively (read here: without any plugin). This trend was even more accelerated following Apple stance on flash for its products.
This standard became what is now known as HTML5.
The HTML5 Logo. HTML5 would be changing the way videos are streamed on web pages
Thus HTML5 brought, among other things, the
<video>tag to the web.This new tag allows you to link to a video directly from the HTML, much like a
<img>tag would do for an image.This is cool and all but from a media website’s perspective, using a simple img-like tag does not seem sufficient to replace our good ol' flash:
- we might want to switch between multiple video qualities on-the-fly (like YouTube does) to avoid buffering issues
- live streaming is another use case which looks really difficult to implement that way
- and what about updating the audio language of the content based on user preferences while the content is streaming like Netflix does?
Thankfully, all of those points can be answered natively on most browsers, thanks to what the HTML5 specification brought. This article will detail how today’s web does it.
The video tag
As said in the previous chapter, linking to a video in a page is pretty straightforward in HTML5. You just add a video tag in your page, with few attributes.
For example, you can just write:
This HTML will allow your page to stream some_video.mp4 directly on any browser that supports the corresponding codecs (and HTML5, of course).
Here is what it looks like:
Simple page corresponding to the previous HTML code
This video tag also provides various APIs to e.g. play, pause, seek or change the speed at which the video plays.
Those APIs are directly accessible through JavaScript:
However, most videos we see on the web today display much more complex behaviors than what this could allow. For example, switching between video qualities and live streaming would be unnecessarily difficult there.
YouTube displays some more complex use-cases: quality switches subtitles a tightly controlled progressive-download of the video…
All those websites actually do still use the video tag. But instead of simply setting a video file in the src attribute, they make use of much more powerful web APIs, the Media Source Extensions.
The Media Source Extensions
The “Media Source Extensions” (more often shortened to just “MSE”) is a specification from the W3C that most browsers implement today. It was created to allow those complex media use cases directly with HTML and JavaScript.
Those “extensions” add the MediaSource object to JavaScript. As its name suggests, this will be the source of the video, or put more simply, this is the object representing our video’s data.
The video is here “pushed” to the MediaSource, which provides it to the web page
As written in the previous chapter, we still use the HTML5 video tag. Perhaps even more surprisingly, we still use its src attribute. Only this time, we're not adding a link to the video, we're adding a link to the MediaSource object.
You might be confused by this last sentence. We’re not talking about an URL here, we’re talking about an abstract concept from the JavaScript language, how can it be possible to refer to it as an URL on a video tag, which is defined in the HTML?
To allow this kind of use cases the W3C defined the
URL.createObjectURLstatic method. This API allows creating an URL, which will actually refer not to a resource available online, but directly to a JavaScript object created on the client.This is thus how a MediaSource is attached to a video tag:
And that’s it! Now you know how the streaming platforms play videos on the Web!
… Just kidding. So now we have the MediaSource, but what are we supposed to do with it?
The MSE specification doesn’t stop here. It also defines another concept, the SourceBuffers.
The Source Buffers
The video is not actually directly “pushed” into the MediaSource for playback, SourceBuffers are used for that.
A MediaSource contains one or multiple instances of those. Each being associated with a type of content.
To stay simple, let’s just say that we have only three possible types:
- audio
- video
- both audio and video
In reality, a “type” is defined by its MIME type, which may also include information about the media codec(s) used
SourceBuffers are all linked to a single MediaSource and each will be used to add our video’s data to the HTML5 video tag directly in JavaScript.
As an example, a frequent use case is to have two source buffers on our MediaSource: one for the video data, and the other for the audio:
Relations between the video tag, the MediaSource, the SourceBuffers and the actual data
Separating video and audio allows to also manage them separately on the server-side. Doing so leads to several advantages as we will see later. This is how it works:
And voila!
We’re now able to manually add video and audio data dynamically to our video tag.
It’s now time to write about the audio and video data itself. In the previous example, you might have noticed that the audio and video data were in the mp4 format.
“mp4” is a container format, it contains the concerned media data but also multiple metadata describing, for example, the start time and duration of the media contained in it.
The MSE specification does not dictate which format must be understood by the browser. For video data, the two most commons are mp4 and webm files. The former is pretty well-known by now, the latter is sponsored by Google and based on the perhaps more known Matroska format (“.mkv” files).
Both are well-supported in most browsers.
Media Segments
Still, many questions are left unanswered here:
- Do we have to wait for the whole content to be downloaded, to be able to push it to a SourceBuffer (and therefore to be able to play it)?
- How do we switch between multiple qualities or languages?
- How to even play live contents as the media isn’t yet finished?
In the example from the previous chapter, we had one file representing the whole audio and one file representing the whole video. This can be enough for really simple use cases, but not sufficient if you want to go into the complexities offered by most streaming websites (switching languages, qualities, playing live contents etc.).
What actually happens in the more advanced video players, is that video and audio data are split into multiple “segments”. These segments can come in various sizes, but they often represent between 2 to 10 seconds of content.
Artistic depiction of segments in a media file
All those video/audio segments then form the complete video/audio content. Those “chunks” of data add a whole new level of flexibility to our previous example: instead of pushing the whole content at once, we can just push progressively multiple segments.
Here is a simplified example:
This means that we also have those multiple segments on server-side. From the previous example, our server contains at least the following files:
./audio/ ├── segment0.mp4 ├── segment1.mp4 └── segment2.mp4 ./video/ └── segment0.mp4
Note: The audio or video files might not truly be segmented on the server-side, the Range HTTP header might be used instead by the client to obtain those files segmented (or really, the server might do whatever it wants with your request to give you back segments).
However, these cases are implementation details. We will here always consider that we have segments on the server-side.
All of this means that we thankfully do not have to wait for the whole audio or video content to be downloaded to begin playback. We often just need the first segment of each.
Of course, most players do not do this logic by hand for each video and audio segments like we did here, but they follow the same idea: downloading sequentially segments and pushing them into the source buffer.
A funny way to see this logic happen in real life can be to open the network monitor on Firefox/Chrome/Edge (on Linux or windows type “Ctrl+Shift+i” and go to the “Network” tab, on Mac it should be Cmd+Alt+i then “Network”) and then launching a video in your favorite streaming website.
You should see various video and audio segments being downloaded at a quick pace:
Screenshot of the Chrome Network tab on the Rx-Player’s demo page
By the way, you might have noticed that our segments are just pushed into the source buffers without indicating WHERE, in terms of position in time, it should be pushed.
The segments’ containers do in fact define, among other things, the time where they should be put in the whole media. This way, we do not have to synchronize it at hand in JavaScript.
Adaptive Streaming
Many video players have an “auto quality” feature, where the quality is automatically chosen depending on the user’s network and processing capabilities.
This is a central concern of a web player called adaptive streaming.
YouTube “Quality” setting. The default “Auto” mode follows adaptive streaming principles
This behavior is also enabled thanks to the concept of media segments.
On the server-side, the segments are actually encoded in multiple qualities. For example, our server could have the following files stored:
./audio/ ├── ./128kbps/ | ├── segment0.mp4 | ├── segment1.mp4 | └── segment2.mp4 └── ./320kbps/ ├── segment0.mp4 ├── segment1.mp4 └── segment2.mp4 ./video/ ├── ./240p/ | ├── segment0.mp4 | ├── segment1.mp4 | └── segment2.mp4 └── ./720p/ ├── segment0.mp4 ├── segment1.mp4 └── segment2.mp4A web player will then automatically choose the right segments to download as the network or CPU conditions change.
This is entirely done in JavaScript. For audio segments, it could, for example, look like that:
As you can see, we have no problem putting together segments of different qualities, everything is transparent on the JavaScript-side here. In any case, the container files contain enough information to allow this process to run smoothly.
Switching between languages
On more complex web video players, such as those on Netflix, Amazon Prime Video or MyCanal, it’s also possible to switch between multiple audio languages depending on the user settings.
Example of language options in Amazon Prime Video
Now that you know what you know, the way this feature is done should seem pretty simple to you.
Like for adaptive streaming we also have a multitude of segments on the server-side:
./audio/ ├── ./esperanto/ | ├── segment0.mp4 | ├── segment1.mp4 | └── segment2.mp4 └── ./french/ ├── segment0.mp4 ├── segment1.mp4 └── segment2.mp4 ./video/ ├── segment0.mp4 ├── segment1.mp4 └── segment2.mp4This time, the video player has to switch between language not based on the client’s capabilities, but on the user’s preference.
For audio segments, this is what the code could look like on the client:
You may also want to “clear” the previous SourceBuffer’s content when switching a language, to avoid mixing audio contents in multiple languages.
This is doable through the SourceBuffer.prototype.remove method, which takes a starting and ending time in seconds:
Of course, it’s also possible to combine both adaptive streaming and multiple languages. We could have our server organized as such:
./audio/ ├── ./esperanto/ | ├── ./128kbps/ | | ├── segment0.mp4 | | ├── segment1.mp4 | | └── segment2.mp4 | └── ./320kbps/ | ├── segment0.mp4 | ├── segment1.mp4 | └── segment2.mp4 └── ./french/ ├── ./128kbps/ | ├── segment0.mp4 | ├── segment1.mp4 | └── segment2.mp4 └── ./320kbps/ ├── segment0.mp4 ├── segment1.mp4 └── segment2.mp4 ./video/ ├── ./240p/ | ├── segment0.mp4 | ├── segment1.mp4 | └── segment2.mp4 └── ./720p/ ├── segment0.mp4 ├── segment1.mp4 └── segment2.mp4And our client would have to manage both languages and network conditions instead:
As you can see, there’s now a lot of ways the same content can be defined.
This uncovers another advantage separated video and audio segments have over whole files. With the latter, we would have to combine every possibility on the server-side, which might take a lot more space:
segment0_video_240p_audio_esperanto_128kbps.mp4 segment0_video_240p_audio_esperanto_320kbps.mp4 segment0_video_240p_audio_french_128kbps.mp4 segment0_video_240p_audio_french_320kbps.mp4 segment0_video_720p_audio_esperanto_128kbps.mp4 segment0_video_720p_audio_esperanto_320kbps.mp4 segment0_video_720p_audio_french_128kbps.mp4 segment0_video_720p_audio_french_320kbps.mp4 segment1_video_240p_audio_esperanto_128kbps.mp4 segment1_video_240p_audio_esperanto_320kbps.mp4 segment1_video_240p_audio_french_128kbps.mp4 segment1_video_240p_audio_french_320kbps.mp4 segment1_video_720p_audio_esperanto_128kbps.mp4 segment1_video_720p_audio_esperanto_320kbps.mp4 segment1_video_720p_audio_french_128kbps.mp4 segment1_video_720p_audio_french_320kbps.mp4 segment2_video_240p_audio_esperanto_128kbps.mp4 segment2_video_240p_audio_esperanto_320kbps.mp4 segment2_video_240p_audio_french_128kbps.mp4 segment2_video_240p_audio_french_320kbps.mp4 segment2_video_720p_audio_esperanto_128kbps.mp4 segment2_video_720p_audio_esperanto_320kbps.mp4 segment2_video_720p_audio_french_128kbps.mp4 segment2_video_720p_audio_french_320kbps.mp4
Here we have more files, with a lot of redundancy (the exact same video data is included in multiple files).
This is as you can see highly inefficient on the server-side. But it is also a disadvantage on the client-side, as switching the audio language might lead you to also re-download the video with it (which has a high cost of bandwidth).
Live Contents
We didn’t talk about live streaming yet.
Live streaming on the web is becoming very common (twitch.tv, YouTube live streams…) and is again greatly simplified by the fact that our video and audio files are segmented.
Screenshot taken from twitch.tv, which specializes in video game live streaming
To explain how it basically works in the simplest way, let’s consider a YouTube channel which had just begun streaming 4 seconds ago.
If our segments are 2 seconds long, we should already have two audio segments and two video segments generated on YouTube’s server:
- Two representing the content from 0 seconds to 2 seconds (1 audio + 1 video)
- Two representing it from 2 seconds to 4 seconds (again 1 audio + 1 video)
./audio/ ├── segment0s.mp4 └── segment2s.mp4 ./video/ ├── segment0s.mp4 └── segment2s.mp4
At 5 seconds, we didn’t have time to generate the next segment yet, so for now, the server has the exact same content available.
After 6 seconds, a new segment can be generated, we now have:
./audio/ ├── segment0s.mp4 ├── segment2s.mp4 └── segment4s.mp4 ./video/ ├── segment0s.mp4 ├── segment2s.mp4 └── segment4s.mp4
This is pretty logical on the server-side, live contents are actually not really continuous, they are segmented like the non-live ones but segments continue to appear progressively as time evolves.
Now how can we know from JS what segments are available at a certain point in time on the server?
We might just use a clock on the client and infer as time goes when new segments are becoming available on the server-side.
We would follow the “segmentX.mp4" naming scheme, and we would increment the “X” from the last downloaded one each time (segment0.mp4, then, 2 seconds later, Segment1.mp4 etc.).
In many cases, however, this could become too imprecise: media segments may have variable durations, the server might have latencies when generating them, it might want to delete segments which are too old to save space…
As a client, you want to request the latest segments as soon as they are available while still avoiding requesting them too soon when they are not yet generated (which would lead to a 404 HTTP error).
This problem is usually resolved by using a transport protocol (also sometimes called Streaming Media Protocol).
Transport Protocols
Explaining in depth the different transport protocol may be too verbose for this article. Let’s just say that most of those have the same core concept: the Manifest.
A Manifest is a file describing which segments are available on the server.
Example of a DASH Manifest, based on XML
With it, you can describe most things we learn in this article:
- Which audio languages the content is available in and where they are on the server (as in, “at which URL”)
- The different audio and video qualities available
- And of course, what segments are available, in the context of live streaming
The most common transport protocols used in a web context are:
- DASH
- used by YouTube, Netflix or Amazon Prime Video (and many others). DASH’ manifest is called the Media Presentation Description (or MPD) and is at its base XML.
- The DASH specification has a great flexibility which allows MPDs to support most use cases (audio description, parental controls) and to be codec-agnostic.
- HLS
- Developed by Apple, used by DailyMotion, Twitch.tv, and many others. The HLS manifest is called the playlist and is in the m3u8 format (which are m3u playlist files, encoded in UTF-8).
- Smooth Streaming
- Developed by Microsoft, used by multiple Microsoft products and MyCanal. In Smooth Streaming, manifests are called… Manifests and are XML-based.
In the real — web — world
As you can see, the core concepts behind videos on the web lay on media segments being pushed dynamically in JavaScript.
This behavior becomes quickly pretty complex, as there’s a lot of features a video player has to support:
- it has to download and parse some sort of manifest file
- it has to guess the current network conditions
- it needs to register user preferences (for example, the preferred languages)
- it has to know which segment to download depending on at least the two previous points
- it has to manage a segment pipeline to download sequentially the right segments at the right time (downloading every segment at the same time would be inefficient: you need the earliest one sooner than the next one)
- it has also to deal with subtitles, often entirely managed in JS
- Some video players also manage a thumbnails track, which you can often see when hovering the progress bar
- Many services also require DRM management
- and many other things…
Still, at their core, complex web-compatible video players are all based on MediaSource and SourceBuffers.
----Hopefully this explains what the box above your post is and is reason enough for you to give me a dollar.-----
-
@kcwolf1975 said:
You would still have the same problem, just the opposite now. Instead of hook suicides making it look like the killer is overperforming, it would now look like he is underperforming.
Not necessarily. If they can get the average hook time then they could see the difference of someone getting hooked, going to second stage in 3 seconds, then instant death.
Having the time on hook would help split hook suicide from legitimate kills.
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1095497#Comment_1095497
I'd rather just allow either side to concede.
My concern with a single button press would be people who want to "derank" (especially groups of friends) who would just hit the button the moment a match starts, wasting everyone's time, BP and possibly pip (if they are not considered).
Basically no solution will be flawless because a holes exist to abuse it.
-
@GHOSTfaceP3 said:
It’s up there with DS,BT,adrenaline,dead hard and sprint burst especially against Freddy or people who use nemisis or low terror radius killers it’s a very strong perk..it was broken when it revealed stealth killers lol
Solo survivor with OoO isn't really a threat.
A SWF team with OoO is a pain in the rear, however its also sort of redundant to use with SWF unless the team is just messing about and not doing callouts.
So would I say its "one of the strongest" well yes and no, it depends in which context its being used.
-
Man DBD went from a fun horror game of cat and mouse to a "I want ALL the information spoon fed to me, and I want it NOW!"
-
@Flarefire_Xx said:
Ok so, the new dc penalty is ridiculous because survivors can kill them selves on hook but what can a killer do.. HMMMMMM It’s bologna because I am going to start playing a new killer and when I have no experience with them and I’m rank 8 and getting bullied what should I do, unless I want to be locked out of the game for ever?? This is bullshit.
@TAG said:
The solution in my eyes is to punish people who excessively suicide on hook.
Just let killers open the gates if a DC happens or X amount of time passes. Would give the killers an out, however I also don't want the remaining survivors to be effected with losing a pip if the killer just afks then opens gate. Basic idea to simply tweak for all.
-
@dbizzle said:
DCs are a part of any online game . we havent had them since 2016 we dont need them now. its just silly. if you want to DC you paid for the game do what you like. if you want out of that match and want to go to a new one that is your right. you should not be penalized.
DC punishment have also been a thing in games since Christ was a baby, and I also bought the game and have the reasonable expectation to be able to enjoy my experience without crybabies rage quitting.
-
@altruistic said:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/582/R7IXW29BKRFQ.gif
Happened to me yesterday.
Good thing those DC penalties are in effect!
No bugs, no issues, perfect specimen of a video game!
I see nothing wrong here!
BHVR *Slips a $20 bill into my hand*
-
@Mushwin said:
Uh aggressive? can you just let me know what you mean by aggressive play?
and i play the Mushwin way :D
You mean hanging on a hook? ^.^
-
@ClickyClicky said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1092409#Comment_1092409
High risk 😂😂😂
It’s low effort, high reward.
Actually all Hex perks are "high risk" because they can be nullified before ever seeing use. The issue is too many people are lazy and ignore totems.
-
@Fibijean said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1092773#Comment_1092773
Glad to be of service! Sorry it was so late this time. As I mentioned, I had a very busy day today, and this stream was also a particularly difficult one to summarise with all the complicated technical explanations.
I appreciate the breakdown but can you sum it up in a meme for those of us who don't read?
-
I find when I don't play the game not only am I happy but I'd imagine that the other people feel my radiating happiness from across the seas and that a small part of it rubs into their skin making them slightly more happy than before....that is until they start up a match of DBD and have someone else ruin it for them.
I tried fellas' never forget that!
-
@asergioam said:
As is my understanding, does jobs are done by different teams so it's irrelevant what we think about it because their independent things. What you are asking is more or less like this:
Do you prefer the mechanic to fix your car instead of the tire company to release a new tire for it?
The mechanic can fix your car and the tire company can produce a new type of tire for it at the same time. The difference here is that both teams work for the same company but they have independent tasks. What about asking for behaviour to hire more bug fixing people or improving the bug fix team?
And its that last line I was intending to type about. I understand different people do different tasks but it seems (my sole opinion) that the cosmetic department must be getting a bit more financial funding because they make more money for BHVR. Even though this is a different team it still leaves a poor taste in your mouth when you have bugs from 3 years ago seemingly being shoved behind six new jean brands for survivors.
-
@Elvenmonk said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1088839#Comment_1088839
They can implement a bot and return system to prevent that from being a issue
And yes, it is poor shaming.
Won't speak to your internet prices but I make below the considered "poverty" line here in Canada and my internet is decent but I do get my moments. I don't think its fair that 4 other players need to suffer because I cannot keep a stable connection so i don't complain if a game eventually gives me a DC penalty.
I fail to see where they are "poor shaming" anyone. DBD is far and beyond from the first game to implement DC penalties...and I fail to see why your enjoyment trumps the enjoyment of the 4 other players.
-
@Carlosylu said:
Here's mine:
Me with my usual rank 1, 4 men SWF owning the killer:
https://media1.giphy.com/media/l1J9tDWrfPDnokM00/source.gif
How I imagine the killer:
Oh man I hope this patch we see the matchmaking fixed!!!
Oh....its just some slipper cosmetics...
-
@Peanits said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1089519#Comment_1089519
Running around the map throwing down every single pallet while you're not being chased is griefing. It doesn't matter how you slice it. You are making the match worse for the other survivors.
Not to be "that guy" but you have a tooltip that explicitly says a pallet can be dropped to distract a killer. I have no doubt that people are 99% doing this to troll but I think if all they are doing is dropping pallets it may be a fine line to walk if you punish them.
-
@johnmwarner said:
Remember when people just admitted they DC because "Nurse is OP," or "Ten Huntress in a row brought Iri hatchets," to cover up being mad about losing. Now with DC penalties back no one is quitting for that anymore but the stories are GRAND...
"I was going against a 4 man SWF they all somehow cheated and got themselves onto a roof and held the game hostage so I had to." or "my teammates had me blocked in and they along with the killer all conspired to keep me in the game without any progress forcing me to DC."
Now, those are a bit of an exaggeration but if you go through the forums you will see so many stories of the most unlikely events happening and people wanting to get rid of DC penalties,or at least have an exception for themselves.
Its not my fault I could no longer heal - erhm I mean do gens - ehrm I mean move my camera- damn used those already........The killer was speed hacking!
-
@OtakuBurrito said:
Scorpion. It's about time he got over here.
Double killer release, "The Chain Gang"
-
@ClickyClicky said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1086878#Comment_1086878
Oh please not the “vAlId StRaTeGy” line again.
It’s a lazy way to play used by bad players.
While I agree camping is a boring strat its still 3 years later a strat that works because people would rather complain then adapt and punish camping.
-
@Bunnie said:
Who's smart idea was it to place the exit gates next to each other on most maps? That's like placing a McDonalds a block down from another McDonalds, stupid. The exit gates should not be close enough to where the killer can stand in between them and watch. Makes no sense at all. Especially since killers have free range and have found the hatch by the time they get down to the last two survivors if it's spawned by then. I've seen killers go back and forth between two downed survivors picking them up and dropping them inch by inch across the map to where the hatch is so that they can get to the hatch before the survivor does. I know cause I was trying to help them back up without getting slugged. Like literally following them. It just doesn't seem logical to me. No one's back door is by their front (if someone makes some ######### anatomy joke I'm going to scream).
Have you seen Starbucks? I don't think they erect those without two more on the same street.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1087069#Comment_1087069
LOL, oops. I didn’t even notice that
Haha no problem. I'm pretty sure it was changed but back in the time tunnel the two did not stack. ^.^
-
@xCarrie said:
As much as it would frustrate me i’d have to go with killer. It would be a great learning experience so there’s that.
Which would you choose and why? How long would it take before you start to loose it?
Easily play survivor because that equates to around 2 games and 1 match start disconnect. This gives me time to do other things.
-
@Swiftblade131 said:
Even with an Ethernet cable
I'm just gonna be gettin penalties?
It's spotty, some days it will be fine, sometimes it's about half and half, and then there are those days... it's like rolling a D20, you never know what will happen
And yes, it's the best I can do. :(
well since everyone has pretty much answered your question I instead will send you this adorable video of a basket of puppies! Enjoy!
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/77177#Comment_77177
That’s incorrect. Peanits already once confirmed for me that Mangled & Coulrophobia do stack.
Did you just respond to a post from 2018?
-
@KuromiStarwind said:
Yeah forcing people to do things is pretty fun tbh. That'll learn em
I'm sorry but this is your 72nd post. This puts you into mandatory forum spam cleaning services. You will be able to post again once you have deleted 100 spam posts and a Mod has reviewed your work.
We hope you understand this is for the benefit of the forums so you can all understand a little part of the work our Mods do.
Have a nice day.
-
@Waffleyumboy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1073544#Comment_1073544
I meant that casual players shouldn't want to win, they should want to have fun. A question I have is: "why isn't it fun?"
That is a point I had hoped to hit on. The casual mindset of just having "fun" causes difficulty when the game only has a ranked mode. You may be playing for fun but the other three/two/one teammate you have is playing competitive. Now not only are you fighting to get that pip against the killer but also your teammates who are not helping you work towards an optimal outcome.
Then you have the other side, where you as a casual player simply want to have fun but you have players who are being "tray hard" and things become sort of stale for you. Maybe a teammate DCed yet the killer is still going for their pip (now even harder to get thanks to DC) and you feel the game is being taken way to seriously.
By forcing everyone into a single game mode these two playstyle clash against one another and often lead to a diminished experience. If you had a casual mode and a ranked mode then the people playing in both would mostly share a single goal. Casual people playing in ranked are either never going to get far or are going to all pretty much be focused on getting optimal matches with the understanding this is competitive. Ranked players kicking around in causal are most likely trying gimmick builds or taking a stress break.
I understand there will always be the players who have nothing better to do than ruin the experience of others but I still think this helps funnel everyone into a collective goal.
On the other scale if BHVR came out and said "Hey we want DBD to simply be a casual game of cat vs mouse with horror elements" then competitive players won't be as confused when they add questionable perks or change ones like Ruin that existed for a competitive means, because the Devs have clearly outlined what they want from the game.
Edit: Heading to bed so I likely won't have another response ready. Either way this is just my mindset and my ramblings. Enjoy your day!
-
@Boss said:
Her Teachables: Better Together, Fixated, Inner Strength.
Which of the 3 would you put in your last Perk slot if that slot only allowed Nancy Perks?
Easily the best of her three perks and a great healing perk in general.
While I do enjoy the gimmick nature of fixated its pretty much useless outside of learning the game as a new player....but even then its useless.
Better together isn't terrible but it just isn't worth a slot when you have so many other options.
The biggest problem is that I do not have these perks on my Feng and therefore I cannot use them because playing anyone other than Feng (unless for a daily) is a cardinal sin!
-
@Waffleyumboy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1073497#Comment_1073497
Probably because casual players get to keep their keys, moris, and custom games. Isn't that all they need?
I'm a little confused on what your point is.
If you are reffereing to keys and moris as "casual" elements to the game then I sort of agree. I can say that I am not in favor of either item as it skips the core mechanics of gens/hook and really doesn't add anything positive to the experience of the match as a whole.
As for custom games I'm not sure you could really count that as a "un ranked mode" because you cannot have random people join and are forced to have/find friends to fill the spots. When I play DBD its 99% as a solo player so custom games just isn't an option for me. If the game had a game mode without a ranking system (just as an example, I'm really not sure the game has the playerbase for it right now) I would play a lot more gimmick builds and probably have more fun.
I hope I provided a reasonable response to your comment as I am still a little confused by its original intent.
-
@ClickyClicky said:
It’s objectively killer sided. The stats and data prove this.
Ugh...this is why I don't understand why BHVR released that data.
1: BHVR themselves told us not to take that data to heart as it isn't 100% accurate as specific factors were NOT taken into account.
2: BHVR themselves said they don't have perfect data as there are changes needing to be done for them to gather things more reliably.
For example the Ruin change (supposidly) will actually allow them to see how generator speed affects the game because they could not distinguish this with the old version of the perk.
I really wish they would stop releasing this stuff because people only see what they want to see rather than hearing the whole story.
-
@ASAPTurtle said:
I want to hear what people have to say about the game's health. Mainly from veteran players but new people too.
While I see many important issue being discussed frequently on the forums (all of which are valid) I feel there is one topic I rarely, if at all, see discussed.
I'm going to say the biggest issue with this game right now (from my viewpoint) is the miscommunication between Developers and community. One of the biggest things I see on this forums (aside from survivor vs killer toxic posts) are casual players vs competitive players. Because DBD seems to have no clear indication of what is considered a "win" and yet has only a ranked mode it creates a very awkward divide between these two core groups of players. Each views the game under a different light and has a mindset of balance that benefits their version of the game.
I understand that everyone can have their own personal "win" condition (like having fun or getting at least one kill) but a clear definition of an end goal is essential in a game that pits people against one another. If the game has a clear picture of a more casual goal of counting a win based on bloodpoints earned then people are less likely to feel frustrated by not getting kills/escapes. If the goal is more competitive and its "pips/rank" that define a win then casual players can accept not getting to higher ranks if they wish to simply have fun (or if there was a casual mode without ranks). Without this definition it leaves an odd game of tug of war with both player types fighting over what the game needs to better fulfill their preferred version.
Maybe I'm just rambling on but this to me is a core issue I don't see many people talking about directly and yet I think it would do wonders for player mindset if it was properly addressed. If the Developers plant that flag down and say "This is what we want from DBD" then all players can tailor ideas towards reaching that flag rather than fighting with one another to build their own goals.
-
I have not read anything but I like this option!
-
Its becoming brain dead. I only die if I get face camped or decide I want to mess around.
-
Witness the birth of DBD, lets hope I don't witness the death.
-
*Marriage Intensifies!*
-
@ASurvkillivorer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1064474#Comment_1064474
So what is the deal with the straight line thing. I play on console and we never face Nurses on a regular basis. It sounds hard to believe that actually works against a GOOD Nurse now.
Nurse players weigh in?
Its due to the distance you can blink (and the little delay between now) that a survivor can cover the same distance as you blink while running in a straight line. Basically if you miss a blink attack on a survivor they can gain more distance than you can ever hope to make up (provided a path forward exist).
Now mind you this isn't possible on all maps but it makes playing Nurse on console even tougher because we already have horrible fps to deal with.
-
@darknahu said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1067476#Comment_1067476
You don't understand what I'm trying to say, what other Killer has that kind of skillset?
I don't think It's important but I'm rank 8 and I'm been playing for a week.
You've been playing for a week and therefor do not yet posses the experience to claim Doctor as "broken". It takes time to learn and improve at a game.
Uuugh even typing this is annoying me, not because you have issue with the Doctor but because this is the direction the devs are actually going with the game...
-
@dizbruhlikesthering said:
I know that this will piss many people off, but honestly, i feel like the games have gotten much more "balanced" in the way that developers mean (2 escapes, 2 hooks). Before ruin my team would succeed every third/fourth game, but now its actually more balanced. Even as killer, while obviously much more stressful, you can still 4k many games.
I know however there is problems with emblems and stuff (and what defines a win).
The only thing i have felt an impact of is the rise of camping insidious bubbas, lol, see these all the time pretty much.
The thing i would like to see to make the games a little less stressful for the killers would be to increase the number of gens needing to be completed depending on mapsize. If the map is incredibly huge, maybe you need to fix 7 gens instead of 5. That would atleast help with issues concerning map sizes.
But all an all, i actually like new ruin. What is your opinons on the matter? To big of a nerf, other ideas on what should be fixed, etc?
I think @Nameless hit the nail on the head.
The "new" Ruin isn't a terrible perk (it has some niche uses) but because it left a void that the old Ruin use to fill, (that is now left without a replacement) it has hurt the core match experience.
If the "new" Ruin was to have been introduced as a totally new perk (without replacing the old) I could see it being used in some fun gimmick builds, but the cost of having the perk replace old Ruin came at the killers expense (and the expense of us vet survivors who actually want to see some challenge return to the role).
-
@FogLurker said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1063156#Comment_1063156
Misery loves company.
User Icon checks out.
-
@hocrux said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/127088/dont-end-game-chat-the-killer-ps4
Not everyone gets butthurt like you and quit the game after a salty pm, just disable msg if you can't afford to get your feelings hurt.
Not sure you read the OPs full post...
-
@johnmwarner said:
I mean I think this patch note really emphasizes where their concerns lie. As killer I still encounter survivors who make no noise when downed, this isn't the result of any perks,.
As survivor if I turn the camera the sound from my generator gets louder then quieter.
But hey, as long as the shoelaces on that Meg skin are tight and Myers' pipe has the correct ratio of blood to rust then all is good with the game.
Tighten the laces on Megs shoes and she will make louder grunts of pain.
Really get that rust build up on Myers pipe and the survivors are bound to make noise as they lay on the ground picking rust scrapes out of their cuts...erhm, bludgeonings?
Its just fixing the issues in a way you never dreamed possible!
-
@Tarvesh said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1063973#Comment_1063973
Oh no! They have to wait 10 more seconds? Darn.......
Remember its about survivor fun not killer fun, how dare you want to enjoy the game.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
I am pretty sure the Devs know exactly what they will do after your informative Post.
Trap cooldowns?
-
Voted "Same" only because fun is subjective and I cannot dictate what people enjoy.
If you were to ask me, I use to find killer the more enjoyable role but with the recent changes adding limitations to my builds (must focus on viable if you want a game longer than 4m) and the increasing time crunch with how fast matches can go, I find myself simply being turned off from the game.
-
Must admit I'm not sure what I just voted for but its being added to my vocabulary at some point.
-
@Todgeweiht said:
This is what happens when you give guns to monkeys.
No this is what happens when you give guns to monkeys.
-
@Kalec84 said:
What he is saying is right, accept it or not, survivors have the priority, but devs really need to focus on killers fun, we all keep hearing about perks and stuff that ar fun/not fun, boring/not boring, stressfull/not stressfull, all for survivors and nothing for killers, and when fixed, if is a "nerf" to survivors it is usualli balanced in sone way, if is to killer, is usually a direct cut and killer need to adapt... thats my impression...
@TooKoolFoU said:
Dead By Daylight is a 4V1 game. You need to have a much greater survivor population than killer population. By that, the survivor population needs to find the game to be as relaxing (not to stressful) and casual as possible to some degree so the likelihood of the player to come back is increased. This way the devs can maintain this 4/1 ratio. Too keep a higher survivor population you must try to keep the interest of survivors in mind more or so than killers without completely ruining the killer gameplay or interest. The devs are constantly trying to make not just a balance in gameplay, but a balance in population. As we’ve seen with matchmaking in the past, an imbalance of population can lead to very long que times and typically much more stress on players. If the devs are able to keep survivors interested enough and maintain that number than they can keep matchmaking shorter. With the subtraction of ranking actually being a variable in matchmaking, it will help drop matchmaking restrictions and further more will likely give killers more balanced gameplay. This would help balance the gameplay of the killer because not every survivors will be a loop God to say. That will help killers keep pressure on maps that they may typically be lacking pressure in. For example, This makes sure that not every actual rank 1 worthy team is destroying a rank 1 leatherface on temple of purgation due to the natural imbalances. Also the devs are working on balancing each and every map as they can, as well as killers, to better fit the new model standard the devs are transitioning the game into. Have patients. I’m trying too have patients too during this transition, but I’m also not playing the game much at the moment.
whats your thoughts? (Please leave the heavily 1 sided opinions at home)
-cheers
Edit: My original response was admittedly a little harsh so I have toned it down. Hopefully what is written here better expresses my intent at a conversation rather than coming off as a "flame war".
To address your view point on needing more survivor player than killer players, thus balancing the game to be less stressful for survivor you need to remember that most people do not simply play one role.
Many players may prefer playing one side over the other but ultimately play both sides. If you favor one side and focus on trying to increase the amount of people who play it you risk not only losing those who prefer the neglected side but also push people away from wanting to try/play that side.
While I agree BHVR may need to offer incentives to play one side vs another to keep population in check it is not a smart idea to offer favoritism (and so blatantly at that) to one group as it leave a very poor impression on the other. I for example play both sides (or should say "played as I do not play DBD much/if at all anymore) but prefer killer. With the direction I have seen this game going recently and that horribly written "developer letter" that came with the last big perk/killer change I was pushed away from wanting to come back. I personally do not find it enjoyable to only play one side and yet the one I prefer is slowly having its "fun" aspect replaced with stressful limitations. Now instead of losing a killer/survivor player they have lose someone who filled both roles.
-
If you want to play at optimal levels then yes you have to play as a team, however low ranks and nearly all of mid ranks you can get away (and pip) easily while being selfish.
Also with all the changes that keep cropping up this game is becoming more and more of a 1v1 so its becoming easier to get your pip points while ignoring your team.
Now if its BP you are after as a "win" or the feeling of having the most people escape then I suggest playing in a more team focused way, but if its pips you want you don't really need to worry about saving people unless you want a 2 pip game or reach high ranks where the game puts a heavier point total on you.
-
-
I just want to see the bugs this brings along.