MrSmashem
MrSmashem
About
- Username
- MrSmashem
- Joined
- Visits
- 991
- Last Active
Comments
-
I'd love to switch to PS5, I just don't have the time to hunt one down.
If they enabled cross-progression though, I'd seriously consider moving to PC. I don't have a gaming PC right now, but I've thought about building one. Cross-progression for the games I play would probably push me over the edge.
-
@Pilot said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2291037#Comment_2291037
You forgot that a big majority of perks are locked behind a paywall first and foremost & then behind a grind.
That's a good point, athough, I think you can still pick them up if they pop up in the Shrine, even if you don't own the Killer/Survivor. That's just another addition to the grind/wait, though.
-
@miketheratguy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2291037#Comment_2291037
Well, whether they're "core gameplay elements" is subjective, as is whether they should be rewarded and when. Again, the argument that all the best perks and so forth should just be granted to the player right from the outset goes against the very concept of the game. It's like saying that you should get your high school diploma as soon as you enter kindergarten.
The game's entire design is to play repeatedly for hundreds of hours. By saying that it's not fun and that you should get the good stuff right away is the same as saying "I don't like that the game works the way that it was made to work, they should change it so that I enjoy it more".
That is in no way subjective. Builds are a primary feature of the game because they significantly impact gameplay. A single Perk can completely alter how the match is played on either side, and the same goes for items. I have no idea how you can possibly say that builds are not a core gameplay element.
And yes, the game is designed to be played repeatedly, that doesn't mean that you should lock actual gameplay mechanics behind hundreds/thousands of hours. This is a PVP game, it is inherently competitive; players don't want to be handicapped for hundreds/thousands of hours while they unlock a good build for a Killer, so they can compete against the teams they're paired up against. In order for competitions to be fair, both sides should have equal access the same tools or in this case(asymmetric), the tools provided to them. Thus, if I don't have access to all of my tools, I'm being handicapped in a competitive environment that mind you, is already unbalanced and unfair at it's core.
You're also completely neglecting to see that build variety keeps the game fresh. I dont want to play 300 matches with the same build, while I wait to unlock another decent build, on a single Killer. I want to be able to play all the Killers and experiment with them.
Speaking from personal experience here, there are Killers I wont touch, that I'd love to play with, because at Rank 1, I know Im going to get murdered without a build. And you know what, it gets old using the same crap over-and-over until I can unlock a build on them. That's one reason I switched over to Survivor(along with this games horrible balance), because I can play around with builds, with a much lower time commitment.
And you still haven't answered my original question: If you don't care about the grind and just enjoy playing the game, what problem do you have with this of us who do care about the grind, asking for it to be reduced? You seem to be acting contrarian just for the sake of it.
-
@miketheratguy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2289464#Comment_2289464
I guess I'm looking at it from the other direction. I don't see perks and so forth as being "locked behind a grind", I see them as rewards for playing the game.
Core gameplay elements shouldn't be "rewarded," to you, especially in a PVP game; especially when it takes thousands of hours to unlock them. Cosmetics, fine, but not something as significant as Perks/Items/Add-ons.
-
@van9684 said:
Survivors being toxic isn’t game breaking where as with killer, they can take an entire game hostage if they’re in a bad mood. Survivors play to have fun. Killers play to get a 4K. It will never be fully balanced as the grind is so much different between killer and survivor. It’s refreshing to see a good survivor or survivor team.
Survivors are the only side that can take the game hostage. If Killer just downs, Survivors eventually bleed out. If Killer doesn't do anything, Survivors just do Gens. If Survivors dont do Gens and just hide, the Killer can't do anything, but hope to find them eventually.
-
Group mentality(4v1) and the majority of players are Survivor mains. They like to dish it out, but whine when they're on the receiving end.
Having said that, not everyone is like this, but for those who are, the above applies.
-
@miketheratguy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2287770#Comment_2287770
I'm not playing the game, you're just entirely missing the point.
I'll make it crystal clear: You say that the game is a grind because you don't get rewards for playing it fast enough. Therefore, you have to play a bunch of matches over and over. You don't like doing this. You eventually get your reward, and what do you get to do with it? You get to play a bunch of matches over and over. You now enjoy this.
The game is the same regardless of what items you have or how long it took you to get them. The fundamentals are the same. The structure is the same. The goals are the same. The game does not become a different thing just because you're gotten an item or perk that you wanted to get faster than the game is designed to give you. It is the same game before and after. Therefore it is either a grind at ALL times, no matter what, in which case there is no need to rush it (or, if you hate the grind that much, even play it all). OR, the game is NOT a grind, it's just a game that parcels out rewards at various intervals, and you are choosing to SEE it as a grind until you get the special thing that you want.
Demanding that the "grind" be eliminated is to do nothing to change the nature of the game other than give you the best things upfront, which defeats the goal of encouraging the player to enjoy playing the game repeatedly and working towards various rewards. Do you not understand this yet? Is this that difficult a concept for people to grasp?
It isn't a "grind". No one's forcing anyone to trudge through it in misery, hating every second until somehow the experience turns great just because you've gotten BBQ or whatever other thing you're complaining about not being handed right from the start. It is, like any other game, a system of gaining experience and rewards through playing. It is designed to be played a multitude of times. The more you play, the more you amass nice things. It doesn't have to be a "grind" - AKA a chore - unless you choose to see it that way.
I would agree with you if it weren't for the fact that Perks, Items and Add-ons significantly change the game and are required to be competitive. Builds also alter gameplay and are a core part of the game; we're not talking about meaningless skins and charms. To lock a core part of the game behind a grind that most players will never complete, is a problem, especially when you do the math.
-
@miketheratguy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2287260#Comment_2287260
Sure, if you say so.
Imagine driving through a beautiful country in a beat-up piece of crap car. It works fine, there's nothing wrong with it, it's just not a top of the line luxury model. You're on your way to the auto dealer to buy a better model. You can appreciate the beautiful scenery on your way, enjoying the experience as you go, or you can speed through and think of the entire ride as a chore just because you're not looking at the beautiful scenery through a more expensive window. Regardless of how fast you get the new car, the view is still the same.
Dude, stop playing games. You didn't address a single point that I made and your analogy doesn't even loosely correlate to the topic at hand.
If you want to take a stroll through the countryside, fine, but don't tell the rest of us we're wrong for not joining you.
-
@miketheratguy said:
I'm just going to say the same thing I say to everybody when I hear about the "grind".
The grind is, when you get down to it, literally just playing the game. There's no "end" scenario, no finale where the game has been "completed". The whole design of the game is to play it over and over and over. What's the point of rushing through a bunch of matches when the reward is more matches?
I don't understand why people don't just relax and play the game to have fun instead of trying to hurry to a specific goal like a certain perk or whatever. Once you get it you'll have angrily hurried through the game just to then...play more of the game.
That's a gross over-simplification. Perks/Add-ons drastically change how the game is played and can even make or break certain Killers(at the very least, make them significantly more competitive). Not to mention, some people find it fun to play around with different builds and don't want to dedicate hundreds if not thousands of hours to the game so that they can do that. The game gets stale before they ever make it there. It's not difficult to understand.
Not to mention we're essentially being barred from using content we payed for, without dedicating an inordinate amount of time to the game. This games grind is so bad it puts some F2P games to shame.
Also, why would you defend the grind if it clearly doesn't bother you or appeal to you? If it doesn't concern you, why bother trying to slap down a change that most players want? You seem to be disagreeing just to disagree.
-
@Midori_21 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2286349#Comment_2286349
One of the devs explained in his stream that in-game chat was something they talked about in the beginning days of dbd, and they decided it was not the direction they wanted to go.
Yeah, which I get, but the reality is that players are using comms regardless and it's creating massive balance issues. It doesn't matter what they do or who they balance for, someone is going to get screwed over until they bridge the gap between SWF and Solo; and probably the most significant reason for said gap is comms. Coordination is part of it, but that applies to any game; teams will almost always perform better than randoms. Give Solo the same tools and it will at least bring them up to similar capabilities, then balance will be easier to work on.
The Devs need to adapt and stop holding on to the pieces of their vision that are clearly unhealthy for the game, especially when those pieces are already being subverted and they aren't doing anything to prevent it. It's just silly.
-
@KIKI_ said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2285882#Comment_2285882
It only takes to allow voice chat in-game. Provide the same tools swf have and further develop into better teamwork mechanics. You solve solo vs swf disparity and then balance accordingly. That's it. Such a drastic task. Clearly we need privileged minds for such pursuit
I said the exact thing earlier in the thread and it got completely overlooked, as it seems your comment has been. This is what needs to happen before anything; you need to bridge the gap between SWF and Solo.
Comms need to be implemented for Solo, including non-verbal stuff like a ping system. I think making builds/items visible to other Survivors in the lobby would help, as well.
Once the gap is bridged, then we can talk about balance.
-
@ScottJund said:
Yeah I'm not sure what anyone expected. Even if he played perfectly the game just fundamentally does not work at that level. I still don't understand why people want matches balanced for these types of matches. I don't think they realize that means literally reworking the game from the ground up which will never happen.
That's why, if they aren't going to do anything about SWF, they need to bring solo queue up to that level of potential and then balance the game accordingly.
Right now, there's too much of a gap between SWF and Solo, so balancing for one or the other is going to screw someone over; they need to give the same tools to all players. Sure, a pre-made, coordinated team will always do better than 4 randoms, but that's the same in every game; pre-made teams are almost always going to play better than random match-made teams.
The problem is, not only are Solo's lacking in coordination naturally, but they don't have access to the biggest game-changing tool that most SWF have: comms.
They need to give Solo Q access to comms, imo. I know it doesn't fit their original vision for the game, but sticking their head in the sand and ignoring how powerful comms are(and that they're used), is resulting in this mess we have now.
Once you give Solo Q comms(voice and non-voice I.E. pings etc.), you'll see the overall Survivor performance increase, and then you can start bringing Killer up to speed. I think showing builds/items to your teammates before the match could help, as well. Perfect balance is probably impossible, but you can get much closer to a fair game than what we have now, just not with the massive rift between Solo Q and SWF.
Also, imo, you should always balance a game around the top-level play. If you don't, the game is unbalanced at it's core. If it's unbalanced, at some point it becomes unfair; if it's balanced, you might lose, but at least you know that it was on you. Fairness is at the core of competition.
-
I didn't even think about it being a reference.
I thought it was kind of cheesy when I first heard it, but thinking of it as a nod to RE, I dig it.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2280045#Comment_2280045
I agree.
I think after this disaster, most people would be willing to wait 6 months for a new chapter if it meant the game was playable
Oh, I'd definitely be cool with that. Maybe do a few minor events, drop some skins or something and keep up the Rift, just to keep everyone interested; they could even potentially get MMR fleshed out if it didn't take away from fixing the game's health.
Maybe even split things up into 2 patches/phases, so we get some improvement after 3 months and the rest after 6, to help people feel like things are moving forward.
Whatever it'd look like, I'd be down; this game needs it.
-
@JPLongstreet said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2279948#Comment_2279948
We shouldn't wish for things like this, just for a playable game.
What you don't realize, is that stuff like that will ultimately result in this game finally getting fixed. When BHVR loses enough money, they'll be forced to either change or sink. As long as they're getting their $$$, they don't care if their game is a broken mess because they have no incentive to fix it; they just need it to be minimally serviceable.
I'd give them the benefit of the doubt, but after seeing this happen over-and-over again(along with their reluctance to fix long-standing issues with the game), I can't find any reason to think otherwise.
And in relation to this thread, Im on PS4 Pro and having loads of frame drops and performance issues, more-so than probably ever before. There's no reason this game shouldn't be running at a somewhat, if not completely stable 60 fps by now, across all platforms. What happened to those console optimization promises from 2019?
Based on where we're at now and the constant botching of updates, I'd say this game needs a serious health overhaul; not just for everything that's going on now, but to make sure things go smoother in the future, as well. The more you add on top of an outdated and faulty foundation, the worse things are going to get with each new addition, and the harder it's going to be to fix.
Fix the foundation.
-
Killer in concept; I love playing solo vs a team, plus hunting down Survivors seems fun.
I started as a Killer main and stuck with it for a good while, but Killer at high levels can be miserable(especially if you don't want to play the top-tier Killers), so I've slowly moved more and more to the Survivor side. Now I mainly play Survivor; it can be insanely frustrating if you get bad teammates(or a scummy Killer; looking at you facecamping Bubba), but Killer still takes the cake for potential frustration levels.
If they ever fix the balance issues with this game, I'll probably go back to the Killer side(or at least play 50/50). Until then, for my sanity, I'm planning on sticking mostly to Survivor.
-
@Zixology said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2115015#Comment_2115015
Why punish people for not having fun?
Because you're in a game with 4 other people who might be. If you can't suck it up for 10 minutes for the sake of everyone else, maybe you shouldn't be playing a multiplayer game.
-
Nah, we dont need more free ragequit mechanics. One is too much, as is.
-
@ShamelessPigMain said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2111431#Comment_2111431
Because my therapist recommended I stop running info perks so I don't have to see my teammates doing absolutely nothing.
Felt this.
-
It stands up when idling and while hooked, as well. This hair worked for like a week post-Rift and has been broken since. PS4 Pro here.
-
Actually, you can still drop the pallet, get hit and the Killer doesn't get stunned; happened on my first pallet drop today. It wasn't fixed at all, despite what the patch notes say.
-
Probably because they're trying for trick-shots and montage moments. Huntress is the sniping montage killer of DBD; its all about getting those flashy hatchet hits/downs.
-
Dead Hard / Windows of Opportunity / Kindred / Inner Strength
If I feel like bringing a Med Kit, I'll swap out Inner Strength for something else; that something else depends on my mood.
-
@Mr_K said:
Could of been worse.
Man's got a point.
Seriously though, the Bloodweb and Perk system need complete overhauls. This game has progressed too much for those systems to be even remotely satisfactory, anymore. The grind is mobile-level nonsense and works against one of the greatest strengths this game has going for it: build variety.
Prestige can be as much of a grind as you/they want, but imo, they should be making Perks and Items easily accessible, so that players can really play around with their builds. I can't tell you how many times I've taken a break from the game(weeks) because I was stuck with a certain build and didn't want to grind for a new one. I even avoid playing certain Killers altogether, because I don't have a build for them.
Rewind to 2017-2018 when I got the game, and I actually quit after only a couple of days because of the grind; didn't come back until 2019 and that was just by chance. I'm sure there are loads of new players who do the same thing, but don't come back, and I can't blame them. The game needs some serious changes to the overall progression/unlock systems.
-
@Predated said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2082312#Comment_2082312
"If RNG determined the victor, the second the map loaded in, in favor of either side, the game would immediately end and give the victory to the favored side."
This is what happens the majority of "high skill" gameplay tho. Tons of games with survivors not being able to use resources in the game due to a lack of them being spawned on, tons of games with killers being unable to reach survivors due to too many resources being spawned into the game. So yes, RNG determines the victor. The only reason you dont notice this, is because most people dont really play competitive.
Dude, you're saying RNG is what determines who wins or loses, but then you're saying "only in high-skilled games." You are literally contradicting yourself. What you are talking about is balance, RNG affects balance and can tip the game in either side's favor; that doesn't negate the role that skill plays in the game.
Pure RNG is not competitive. If I grab die and say first to roll "8," wins, thats not a competition; it's pure luck/chance. In DBD, if the map favors one side, that side can still lose based on their skill. Thus, skill is the determining factor in who wins/loses and past a certain point, the imbalance of the game and counter-productive nature of RNG becomes extremely evident.
That is why this game is competitive, but not balanced.
-
@Jago said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081661#Comment_2081661
Imagine a baseball game where any round is randomly generated, just like dbd. Its Rng, not competition.
Competition is fighting against each others, on the same level. Baseball yes, football yes, League of Legend yes, Street fighter yes. Dbd no.
Rank is an illusion of progression. "Skill" is just knowledge of maps. Its not competitive.
Sorry stretched res users.
Gross oversimplifications and falsehoods here. Competition doesn't require equal skill, a fair competition would(given balance existed within the game). Also, RNG doesn't determine the victor in this game, it does play a part in balance, though. If RNG determined the victor, the second the map loaded in, in favor of either side, the game would immediately end and give the victory to the favored side. You have to have skill and knowledge in order to utilize RNG to your advantage, at which point balance is called into question.
Skill is also not knowledge of the maps, it's understanding how to utilize said knowledge and doing so in-game. And yeah, lets disregard every other mechanic in the game and pretend map knowledge is all this game has going for it.
-
@Predated said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081946#Comment_2081946
Except you can get max BP as a killer with only 1 kill. You can get max BP as a survivor even if you die.
And in competitive games? You get ELO. You get rank rewards at the end of the season. You gain more xp than if you lose. You gain much more currency than if you were to lose. And if you lose, you actually lose ELO.
Besides succeeding at your objective, that can be done by getting 1 kill as a killer. That can be done by 1 survivor escaping. Both, again, very arbitrary. You wont consider 1 survivor escaping a loss. But survivors succeeded at their objectives if at least 1 survivor escapes.
So you're claiming that because you aren't rewarded for winning, it isn't competitive, although winning/losing is in-and-of itself a core element of competition, along with the other factors I laid out above. Rewards aren't necessary for competition. I've played plenty of sports outside of a regulated format where winning netted me nothing more than the satisfaction of doing so; that was still competing.
Also, you're just moving goalposts at this point. Bottom line, if you dont want to believe that a PVP game which consists of 2 opposing sides playing against each other to secure an objective, is inherently competitive, fine; that doesn't change reality, though.
-
@Predated said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081845#Comment_2081845
"strive to gain or win something by defeating or establishing superiority over others who are trying to do the same."
Tell me, what do you gain? What do you win? Nothing.
You win by succeeding at your objective. For Killer, thats killing and for Survivor, thats surviving. In terms of "what," you get for winning, Survivors get extra BP for an escape and Killers get extra BP for sacrifices/kills, so thats something. What do you get in most PVP games for winning, besides maybe a currency bonus or extra xp?
-
Very rarely, maybe once every 10-15 games? Could be less.
-
@Predated said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081661#Comment_2081661
"The reality is that RNG does not determine the victor in DBD, skill does. If RNG lines up for Survivors, but they can't take advantage of it(I.E. skill), they lose."
My point is assuming both sides to be capable. AKA both sides have a similar or equal skill level. In fact, in the majority of Mario Party games, they allows you to win based on skill if the others are lacking because winning all the minigames essentially allows you to win the game. My point is more that assuming both killer and survivors are equally skilled, RNG dictates the win. The difference is that often you dont realize it did because you were having fun along the way. But ever since I made this post, I have been playing purely looking at what the games have offered me and how players were playing, and you'd be surprised how often a 3k is made purely due to a lack of pallets/structures spawning in, and how often 3 people escape due to too many pallets/structures spawning in. Regardless of the skill on either side, people lose who are not the better player, and people win despite being objectively worse.
"And there is something that is competed over in DBD. The Killer is competing to kill, the Survivors are competing to survive. "
And you are confusing opposition with competition.
"Is baseball not competitive because each team is responsible for a different objective? No, their objectives are intertwined and in direct opposition to each other."
Except, that in baseball, YOU SWITCH SIDES, THEN COMPARE SCORES. So yes, their objectives are EXACTLY THE SAME.
You made my point, "both sides have similar or equal skill." RNG has to do with balance and fairness, not competition, when skill is factored in.
And dude, you don't need the same objective to compete:
com·pete
/kəmˈpēt/
verb
- strive to gain or win something by defeating or establishing superiority over others who are trying to do the same.
That applies to DBD, regardless of subjective objectives. You have 2 opposing sides, acting directly against each-other using skill, wit and tactics to secure a victory over the other side. Its a competion.
-
@th3 said:
I'd argue Windows is terrible, right when you need it the most it disables. A perk that helps much much more to make the killer have a hard time is deja vu.
They key is to use it to plan your route before it goes down.
-
He's making a joke about how playing the game as a Killer is basically always a bad experience.
-
@Predated said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081218#Comment_2081218
Mario Party is also PVP. Yet not a competitive game. Opposition is not competition.
You can personally infer opposition to be competition, but that is a personal opinion. Competition requires something to compete for. There is nothing you're competing for.
Mario Party, outside of the mini-games, is almost completely RNG-based. When the victor is determined solely by RNG, that's when you can make the argument that a game is not truly competitive. The reality is that RNG does not determine the victor in DBD, skill does. If RNG lines up for Survivors, but they can't take advantage of it(I.E. skill), they lose.
And there is something that is competed over in DBD. The Killer is competing to kill, the Survivors are competing to survive. Their objectives arent the same, but they literally revolve around each other and are in direct opposition to one another. In order for the Killer to succeed at his objective, he has to directly interact with the Survivors and vice-versa(or rather, avoid interaction, which still involves playing against).
In baseball, one team is batting and running bases, the other is catching and trying to stop them. Is baseball not competitive because each team is responsible for a different objective? No, their objectives are intertwined and in direct opposition to each other.
You can try to spin it however you want to, but this is a competitive game.
-
Dude, its PVP; PVP is inherently competitive. Imbalanced and not ready for tourney play sure, but definitely a competitive game by definition. No amount of RNG, imbalance or differing objectives negates the competitive nature of the game, they just dictate how fair the competition is.
-
Everyone should get more BP; a lot more.
-
Favorite:
-Ghostface
-Pig
-Blight
-Huntress
-Pyramid
Honorable mention: Demo
Least:
-Doctor
-Freddy
-Clown
-Deathslinger
-Twins
Honorable mention: Hag
-
@FrenziedRoach said:
Because top 1% is only 1% of the playerbase.
If the balance is fine for most of the playerbase, there isn't a problem. The problem is with those trying to put money and prestige on a title that was never designed for that in the first place.
The balance should be fair at its core and should be tailored around what is ultimately possible; the top 1% gets as close to that as possible and thus, shows what needs changing.
When you balance a game around the majority, you get an unbalanced mess that constantly falls apart, especially if you start to deviate from the majority. That results in player retention issues, because as players get better and start to deviate(as they do), they start getting screwed. You basically have a revolving door or new players coming in, getting excited, gaining experience, getting frustrated and then leaving. That, and you have a broken game.
-
I'd submit another ticket.
-
@mouse0270 said:
So to be clear... Toxic is overly used for this community... There are games out there that has way more offensive language then this game.
However, trash talking someone is fine in a game... However it should remain in game... Messaging someone out of game is differently to much.
Lastly just to be clear... Trash talking is okay... being racist, homophobic, sexist, etc... Thats not okay under any means... But calling someone ######### because they tunneled you in a game, as long as its in the in game chat... I approve.
Man, this is kind of off-topic, but your post reminded me of something. I remember back in the late 2000's early 2010's when I played a bit of LoL, the word "toxic," started blowing up. I had been gaming for years and never saw it up to that point and suddenly, everything was "toxic." It really annoyed me back then and it's crazy how much things have progressed since then. Just looking at how people are nowadays, its crazy to think that "toxic," was just the beginning. Everyone is constantly labeling people: toxic, hateful, racist, sexist, etc.
I miss the days when idiots were just idiots, regardless of why, and we just moved on with our lives.
-
I think he has a cool design, but imo, he looks like a JRPG boss or an anime villain running around the map. He sticks out like a sore thumb, to me and I don't even remotely view him as a Killer. Idc what his lore is, at the end of the day, what I see in game is what matters.
And I really don't care about the flashy design or that he's associated with K-Pop; that's all fine, but they could've done it in a way that fit the theme of the game. He just looks out of place as-is, from his design to his animations.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1967801#Comment_1967801
Yeah. Bloodpoints are easy af to farm. Like on a good run I can get like 500k a night on killer.
I dont buy it. This person put 7739 hours into the game to get all Perks on everyone at prestige 3, along with Tomes and Achievements.
If you have everything on everyone at 1000 hours, that means getting everything on everyone at prestige 3 should take max 3000 hours. Thats also not taking into consideration that you can instantly prestige from level 50 without getting all of the Perks and the first time takes the longest since you have to unlock everything from scratch.
So you mean to tell me that this guy/girl spent 4739 or more hours just doing Tomes and Achievements, which they were probably doing as they were unlocking stuff anyways? Nah, that doesn't add up; and my personal experience says that doesn't add up either.
-
@ProfoundEnding said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1969864#Comment_1969864
I just wish the animations didn't look even worse then the orginal ones. Now when you're crouched and want to move your camera angle, your character's head teleports to the direction you want to look instead of them actually turning their head like a normal person.
I agree with this. I think a couple of the animations look alright, but the walking animation specifically looks much worse. Also, crouch walking looks like something out of a Scooby Doo cartoon.
-
@Dragonshensi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1968764#Comment_1968764
I was doing a hex totem and he came and boxed me in.
Well, if he was close enough to box you in, he was close enough to get the hit regardless. If he just stood there without hitting you, he's just wasting time, which is actually good for your team.
Also, once he hits you, collisions are briefly turned off, so you can run through him to get out.
-
@Dragonshensi said:
If you get trapped in a corner good luck getting out. I can’t tell how many times I’ve been stuck in a one way area with the killer blocking me in. Just happened to me in Mcmillian estate. He missed me, but he took his time cause I couldn’t get past him. I was literally stuck and his body blocked the only way out. How is that fair? You’re just giving the killer a free hit
I mean, if he's chilling there and staring you down, your whole team has free reign to pound gens. If you're just getting boxed in and hit, stop running into corners.
-
@gendoss said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1967833#Comment_1967833
Well this is exactly what everybody wanted... If you don't like it i'm sorry but literally everybody was complaining and then when this new UI got revealed everybody was fine with it.
I know for a fact that its not what everybody wanted. I've read over-and-over since they announced the updated, version of the new UI, people either saying "just change it back," or "it looks better, but they need to..."
Heck, when they showed the updated version, people were still(and still are) photoshopping different versions because they still dont like it. Idk if you just dont look around or if you're in some kind of denial bubble, but most(based on everything I've seen) still aren't happy with the final result, even if it is better than the original updated version.
-
@gendoss said:
Everybody else is doing fine maybe you shouldn't be blaming your losses on the new UI or just get used to it.
Glad you know how everyone else is doing. The Devs should definitely look in to hiring you since you seem to have some sort of singularity with the entire playerbase; they'd never need a data sheet again.
Crazy.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1965509#Comment_1965509
I have less than a thousand hours and have most perks unlocked for everyone. I don't know what you're doing different :o
Both sides, including teachables and all Perks are tier 3? As in, you can go to any Killer or Survivor and you have every Perk at tier 3 available to them?
-
@Sadsnacks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1965509#Comment_1965509
Its intentionally designed that way.
Id guess that the devs are afraid people will lose interest quickly if the game didnt have as much if a grind.
To some degree that might be true, if you take away the grind youre not really left with that much gameplay variation but it would still be fun being able to experiment with different perk combos without having to grind 1000s of hours to try them.
By the time ive unlocked all the teachables, which takes somewhere around 500+ hours if youre being as efficient as possible, i have almost zero motivation to go through like 100 or more bloodwebs per character to unlock all the perks for every character.
Youve totally got a point. Like why are we paying for characters and new teachables and still have to grind so many hours to use them?
Other games have way more gameplay variation and take i tiny fraction of the time to complete, yet this game takes the least amount of gameplay and stretches it across 10k hours. Its ludicrous.
I almost *lost* interest because of the grind, lol.
I actually quit 2-3 years ago, right after I bought the game, because of the grind. I tried it again a couple of years later and had enough fun that I stuck with it, but almost decided to drop it again. If it weren't for the Bloodpoint events, BBQ and Ghastly Gateau's, I probably would have; and I can't imagine Im the only one.
If there's going to be any kind of grind, it should be a cosmetic grind. Gameplay elements can be earned(even though, I personally think that's stupid, in general), but they should be quickly earned. That way you can enjoy screwing around with different builds and Killers/Survivors(and actually have the capability of being competitive), while grinding for stuff like cosmetics or rank. That would potentially even boost sales, because players could use everyone, thus they'd be willing to buy cosmetics for everyone. Plus, it'd make the game more accessible for new players.
Idk, man. It seems so obvious, but yet, here we are.
-
"The grind isn't that bad."
Congrats, but dude; the progression in this game is absolutely busted. It shouldn't take nearly a year of non-stop play to fully access the game I spent $40 dollars on(not including DLC). This game puts F2P games to shame. Its disgusting.
I've probably put close to 1000 hours in and imo, I should easily have every perk on every Killer/Survivor by now, by virtue of them being a literal functional aspect of the game. Cosmetic grind, sure...do what you want, but perks, thats gonna be a big no from me dawg.
Side note, I know you said challenges and achievements were a part of this, but even 6739, heck 5739 hours is far too much to require for full functionality of gameplay mechanics.
-
Survivor: Kate, but I'll be picking up Feng as well, once I can get that backpack torso(Iri Shards). I like them backpacks, yo. (I also use Kates Rift backpack torso).
Female Survivors are also smaller and their animations look better imo, so I usually stick to them.
Killers: Pig, Ghostface, Huntress, Pyramid and Blight are my favorites. I usually just cycle through those and occasionally hit up another Killer for variety.