Rydog
Rydog
About
- Username
- Rydog
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,015
- Last Active
Comments
-
They say that they reduced the grind, but in reality they rearranged the deck chairs to make it seem like it's better, when it's really not. There's a prestige tax, the Shrine is nerfed, it effectively costs more to unlock a character's perks, and BP-boosting perks have been redesigned. But hey, those category caps are 10,000 now instead of 8,000. They need to just remove perk tiers and increase BP intake like 200%. Make the amount we get from Bloodhunt events the NORM.
They seem like they are just really unreasonably scared of upsetting the apple cart in terms of keeping players engaged with the game, like they think people are gonna run out of things to do and stop playing or something. So their solution is to try nothing substantial. Just do it and see what happens, FFS.
In summary...
They:
- Gave us a one-time boost that unlocked all perks on already-prestiged (and very well-developed) characters. This was nice, but it's also not relevant to newer players, and it was a one-and-done thing.
- Increased the Bloodpoint softcap by 1,000,000.
- Raised the four category caps from 8,000 to 10,000 each.
- Added a role-based matchmaking BP incentive (it's been broken this entire time, but this is a positive in the long-term).
They also:
- Took away the BP bonuses on Barbecue & Chili, and We're Gonna Live Forever.
- Effectively raised the threshold to unlock a character's teachable perks from level 40 to level 51.
- Add a 20,000 BP prestige tax for each loop.
- Nerfed the Shrine of Secrets such that it costs an exorbitant amount of Iridescent Shards to unlock a single perk -- and reduced its Bloodpoint conversion by 33%.
- Changed the prestige system, such that it requires three full loops (roughly 4.8 million BP) in order to perma-unlock a character's tier 3 perks for all characters.
-
Matchmaking is deeply questionable at best. You can't even see your MMR, so how much could you really, realistically care about it?
Also, the matchmaking tool broadens its search over time in ways that are not clear to us, people will throw games or do stupid stuff at all levels of play, and there are so many random factors in every game that any sort of real competitive MMR-centric play incentive is a gamble at best.
In other words, just play, do your best, and hope you don't get donkey-brained teammates. Sometimes you eat the bear, and sometimes the bear eats you.
-
Unless a survivor is...
- Small (and by extension for DBD's usual logic also female)
- Quiet (and I mean Ace or Kate-level quiet, BHVR has really screwed up a lot lately in this department)
- In possession of dark cosmetics
...then why bother playing them unless it's just for goofing around? The last good survivor was Zarina.
(And yeah, I know there are people who have a TOTES ADORBS criteria instead of/in addition to this, so we see a lot of survivors like Mikaela or Yun-Jin or Cheryl. No disrespect to them either, I'm just pointing out that Behaviour is bad at making survivors with a mix of gameplay-positive characteristics that would compel someone like me to build them up and include them in my rotation.)
-
No login bonus for me today, either (it should be 50k BP according to the news story).
-
@MadEyePopo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3111680#Comment_3111680
Yes, your MMR is not per character killer. I combines all your previous matches no matter which killer you play.
I'd heard it speculated that whatever your rating for your highest-MMR killer is, it "leaks" some to all other killers. So they are at some lower baseline, but the rising tide lifts all boats, so to speak. I think the initial idea was that all killers were gonna have a separate rating (which is why they took away the ability to switch killers after queuing), but who knows. The stupid fact that we can't see our MMR leads to all kinds of guesswork.
-
@kizuati said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3080407#Comment_3080407
they legit said it will take them two weeks to fix this. ETA for 6.1.2.
this a joke. unacceptable QA.
Their unwillingness to address issues quickly is so bad.
-
It's now been like 36 hours since this got killswitched, and it's still not turned back on. I dunno why it takes them forever to fix any issue whatsoever. If this were League of Legends or some other big game-as-service they'd have an issue like this sorted out inside of a day.
-
@Dunkinspunkin said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3079658#Comment_3079658
There's pretty well established psychology that disagrees with you. Devs for any game like this need to think about pacing the content. Unlocking everything all at once doesn't keep us playing as long.
I'll use myself as an example to show that even knowing about the psychology doesn't change it. I play much more when I have an incentive than when I just want to have fun. I played like a madman during anniversary event to get 2000 or so anniversary flans, stockpiling them and thinking "After this, I'll take it easy". Then the update came, and I played hard to P3 everyone so I could have perks. But even in the last 2 days, I'd see a random perk on a survivor (I'm a killer main) and think oh crap, if I hurry I can still level Adam and unlock his perks!
Now the update is here, and I played a ton of survivor the first day because of BP incentive. Now that there's no incentive, I'm playing killer to enjoy the new changes, but only in a relaxed way, enjoying being able to do any build I want, but still steering away from the killers who don't have flans. Basically, even when I'm full aware of what they're doing, I chase my points and play harder when I've got something to achieve instead of just enjoying the match.
That's why they do it. Also, not to be harsh here, but you said anything that gets removed is going to FEEL like a penalty. That's on you. They were shrinking the blood web by giving us all these perks and honestly I am SO, SO happy BBQ is gone. While I loved getting more bp, I felt like a hostage for that 4th perk slot. Now I can actually play the full build (i only use BBQ on Sadako right now and I enjoy the info) and design perks based on my goal for the game. For this patch, I basically got millions of BP of unlocked free perks and I got to use 4 perks of my choosing instead of 3. And I don't even need the bp. They're just for slowly and passively increasing prestige now. I couldn't be happier.
Well, I really want them to just come out and say "we have to design it to keep you playing longer, and this is a psychological necessity to our business model" without sugarcoating it. Just say it and own it along with all the obvious ire it will come with, if that's really the case.
I'm of the opinion, mostly, that if you can't just play a game for fun without any other meta-gamification to it, then something's wrong with the game. I would be super happy if the wall were just dramatically lowered, and it would especially help new players a lot.
-
@Zeon_99 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3079272#Comment_3079272
Didn't you guys say that the incentives were there to help with the grind in the absence of BBQ and WGLF? Since when is it now only for helping queue times? The grind is actually much worse now.
I dunno if the patch has been out for long enough to determine whether it is worse, but it definitely feels worse, because they took away things that were previously greasing the BP wheels -- and there's no way to not make that feel like a penalty, even if they add other positive incentives in. ~48 hours out from the patch, one of those incentives is now turned off, so it feels like they're just taking away all the nice things.
BHVR is consistently deficient when it comes to analyzing the human component of how a change feels vs. what it accomplishes, vis a vis whatever game analytics and numbers they are looking at. For example, back when they maintained the stance that "Object of Obsession is fine, because our stats say that most survivors who bring it in don't escape." Well, that's great, but it still didn't feel fine. They tend to make changes like this VERY robotically.
I also think they've been disingenuous with how they have framed their intentions around the grind. It's two steps forward, one step back in terms of making it seem like a good set of changes (and in some ways I think it is). But they've sort of just rearranged the deck chairs so that the grind is mostly just the same as before, but a little different. My assumption is that they are too scareded to actually just reduce a lot of the grinds and costs across the board because it will impact their metrics or whatever nonsense, but they refuse to just give us some straight talk about what their goals are here as a business. I'm of the opinion that they should just be really generous about handing things out for free, and making it much easier, with no strings attached and no "we're adding X, buuuuuuut we're taking Y away."
Just give us everything. Make it easier, full stop, no downsides. Increase all normal everyday BP gains by like 100%, make everything cost less in the bloodwebs, knock the prestige rollover down to level 20 instead of level 50. Who cares? It would be a good time for everyone.
-
@Dunkinspunkin said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3079287#Comment_3079287
This is wrong. There was a response to removing bbq, it was letting us earn another 8k points in every match. And considering many of us got millions of BP worth of free perks only days ago with the prestige bumps im disappointed but not surprised that so many people are acting like this was anything other than free generosity.
Anything previously generous that gets removed is still gonna feel like a penalty regardless. They should just give us all the free things with no caveats. Who cares? Just give us more BP, generally! Let us stack up all the BP in all the ways! It feels good when that happens. 2x BP events are when the game feels the best to play.
-
@Mandy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3078979#Comment_3078979
it was actually nothing to do with too much BP, it had a major effect on matchmaking times, which is why the decision to kill switch it was made.
There are no plans for double BP for this, this feature was only ever meant to help with queue times for specific sections when it was needed - it was not meant to be the 100% all the time either, that was not working as intended.
My two cents: The BP intake felt really good on survivor, literally the best it has ever felt. I was actually like "Wow, I don't need to just grind killer games to get BP, for once, this is amazing." The fact that this had such a major impact on matchmaking (i.e. a ton more players were choosing survivor) really ought to tell you guys that baseline survivor BP income needs to be bumped up, just lifted up overall. Otherwise, going forward, playing without the BP bonus is just gonna feel like a penalty.
I'm roughly at "Just give us more stuff for free, with no strings attached. Just give us BP, a lot of it" especially for survivors right now. Let the BP flow freely, forever, and it will make everyone happier. I dunno why you guys don't just have someone manually direct the BP bonus while you figure out why the automation broke down enough for a killswitching (or why it's even still killswitched an entire day later).
EDIT: Heck, killswitch it to +100% for both sides. Now that would be a great short-term solution.
-
It's happening to me now. On PC, cross-platform play enabled, playing as killer (Huntress) in normal matchmaking. It's happening at the match loading screen, after the timer has ticked down.
Almost 48 hours of this and you guys still don't have it fixed. How does this specific type of thing even happen in a game, five years in? Like why would this be a problem suddenly?
EDIT: Yeah, and also, it ate my offering. Can you make it not do that? Can the game consume offerings and such when the game starts, not during the loading screen? It's stupid that we have to effectively lose BP to your random stupid bugs.
EDIT #2: It also de-selected my challenge, which means now I am wasting my time in this match.
-
@Mister_xD said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2579974#Comment_2579974
"The counterplay is to avoid engaging or being seen at all by the killer all game"
i didnt say that though.
i said you should avoid chases as much as possible, meaning you shouldnt unnecessarily harass the Killer when they got nothing to do (as you would do with Killers like Trapper or Hag), to play stealthy so his search times are as long as possible and be efficient on gens, because he cant cover the map quickly to apply pressure.
i never said anything ridiculous like "just never get spotted", those are your words, not mine.
EDIT: had "chases" twice in the first sentence, idk why. so i removed one.
You said "the counterplay to him was to not engage in chases in the first place."
Maybe I am being overdramatic in my interpretation. But nevertheless, it is inevitable (unless you're playing against a very inexperienced killer) that you are going to get found and chased, at some point. At which point, the counterplay as I said was to just weave around and cross your fingers. When I think of counterplay, I mostly think of it in terms of "here's what your course of action ought to be once the chase has started." That situation is what these nerfs are trying to address.
-
the counterplay to him was to not engage in chases in the first place, be stealthy and do gens efficiently.
"The counterplay is to avoid engaging or being seen at all by the killer all game" is not a realistic strategy. I'm confident you understand this about Dead By Daylight.
-
He was completely miserable to play against. He could shoot you 100% outside of TR, and counterplay against him was "weave randomly back and forth and hope for the best." Yeah man, this needed to be nerfed because going against him is one of the most frustrating things in the entire game.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2549762#Comment_2549762
Base kit Kindred would be a huge defacto nerf to killers, far beyond discouraging facecamping. It would be like making BBQ baseline on killers, if not better.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2549775#Comment_2549775
Even mediocre SWF teams can easily communicate 'hey, I'm being camped, be careful'.
Your solution, or C3Tooth's solution would be incredible baseline buffs to survivors, SWF and otherwise. 16m is far, far too big - not only would this stop proxy camping, but it would provide far too much information.
I agree that the distance would probably need to be closer to 8-10 meters.
@Adjatha said:
I don't mind some kind of way to encourage killers to leave hooks. Even if it's some kind of fresh new anti-killer baked-in system. PROVIDED that there is some kind of answer to the "survivors standing out in the open, just outside of catch-able distance, staring at the killer like he's a very interesting bird" problem that promotes camping.
Seriously, it's not camping if your team are all lined up right near the hook, just staring at you and hoping the killer will walk away. The game has STEALTH for a reason. If survivors can't be bothered to sneak or even to ACT like the killer is supposed to be the power role, I'm not going to just give them a completely free unhooking.
Eh, if survivors are all swarming the hook I also would not consider that camping, because they are giving you a reason to stick around.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2549733#Comment_2549733
This isn't terrible, but 16m is still way too large. This would completely nullify proxy-camping, which the devs specifically stated they didn't want to happen. 10m sounds much fairer.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2549750#Comment_2549750
I like it somewhat, but the numbers would have to be almost halved for this not to exceed it's purpose.
The problem though isn't just knowing the killer is there. SWF groups are already calling this out anyway.
The problem is that you won't be able to unhook without getting grabbed, or at best taking a hit and probably having the unhooked person downed again. Which is why I suggested the movement speed penalty which would eventually make an actual facecamper nearly immobile until you are both away.
Eh, I'm not that concerned with hypercompetent SWF groups calling everything out. This would be a solution for making everyone, whether solo or not, aware that facecamping is occurring, so that they can respond appropriately and work gens ASAP instead of wasting time going for a risky unhook trade.
-
@StarLost said:
Short answer: no.
Long answer:
Kindred is way, way too strong to be baseline, unless you substantially nerf it (16m is enormous, and shows which direction the killer is headed in after a hook, which is insanely useful information). You'd have to make something like MAA, BBQ or Discordance baseline for killers to compensate. Your solution would be a whopping baseline buff to survivors even in games where a killer isn't facecamping. Spies is pretty weak in comparison - hell, even Whispers is.
I'd much rather see something like 'if a killer remains within 10m of a hooked survivor for more than 10 seconds, they receive a noise prompt and their aura becomes visible to survivors within 16m until they leave this radius. After another 10 seconds, the killer receives a stacking 10% movement speed penalty every 5 seconds until they leave the radius'.
A little convoluted, but this would make it easier to deal with a facecamper, and wouldn't stop proxy camping.
I rescind my Kindred suggestion, @C3Tooth had a way better idea.
-
@C3Tooth said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2549724#Comment_2549724
I would have Survivor's aura turn to a difference color if Killer is 16m close. So you know Killer is near hook but not exactly where.
Oh, I like that idea! It tells you that the killer is maybe camping, but doesn't give away their whole game plan.
-
@Exxodus21 said:
If Kindred becomes baskit it should only show survivor auras. Being able to see exactly where the killer is, is beyond information even a SWF team can provide.
The intention would be that the only circumstance the killer is visible in, is when they're actively camping the hook. Maybe give it some sort of cumulative time-based trigger for when it turns on (so if a killer immediately leaves the hook, no one sees where they've gone).
The idea isn't to give survivors way way way too much information at all times, it's to establish a consistent consequence for facecamping.
-
@Alphasoul05 said:
The point is to trust the developers when they give you statistics and tell you information. They know best so they know exactly what you should and shouldn't see, and you're just wrong for thinking you should see something like your MMR to know it's actually functional. They can't even show if people are SWF or not so you can decide if you want to deal with that or not in this new system, or if I should when I play solo.
Oddly enough this is one of few games I've played where there is no casual mode, but just a straight competitive mode with MMR. Casual survivor party game that isn't competitive by the way!
"Trust the developers."
"They know best."
You must be new here.
-
@lav3 said:
WIthout any advantage of getting high MMR and laughable reset rewards, I agree. More than that, players deserve to know how their MMR gets affected by kills, hooks, saving & healing teammates, doing generator, escape all these factors very clearly.
The rewards are dumb. A combined killer + survivor rank 1 monthly BP reward should be at least enough to full-perk a single killer who is level 40 (~5.7 million BP or so).
-
@eric_alrasid17 said:
I'm bronze 3 using Pinhead and got 3 Iridescent grade survivor, what a great "skill based" they said
THIS. This is the eternal incorrect perception that they will now have to combat on Twitter. People are going to attach these new grades to the MMR system because it's the only number that is visible to them.
-
@MadLordJack said:
Yet another thread asking the exact same thing that has already been asked and answered multiple times before?
Every casual game has hidden sbmm to prevent massively unfair lobbies, something they don't tell you in order to not get this kind of masisve misunderstanding. The point of the system is to get rid of all the people that want it to be shown and force them into their own hell, instead of leaving them to bully everyone else.
I digress, but I want the people who don't know what gens are, who leave you to hang on your first hook, and who immediately open the gates while everyone has hook states left and there's no NOED, to be forced into their own hell. As someone who runs Kindred, I really, really want a major factor in MMR drops to be "time spent not touching a gen when a Kindred-using survivor gets hooked, and/or not running toward that person, and/or running toward that person when someone else is already doing so." Get those people out of my matches.
-
@Schardon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2483703#Comment_2483703
That's actually a good point you're bringing up here and I can't give you a good answer to that. But assuming we would have those numbers.. like, let's say we're playing on 3400MMR and every other survivors and also the killer has an MMR ranging from 3300-3500. In this scenario we'd have ,objectively speaking, a pretty well balanced match (MMR wise).
Yet the loosing side probably still would complain about having lost and also could complain about the MMR system not working properly.
What values do those numbers hold if we don't know if those numbers get assigned properly? Why would we blindly believe that arbitrary number but not believe in the system without seeing the number?
In the end all we can do is to tell BHVR that we think it's not working properly and they need to take a look at it.
Yeah, "just trust us" is not something Behaviour should reasonably ask or expect DBD's player base to do, given their long history of being stand-up ball-droppers. Just this week, like 65% of Pinhead games were crashing, RPD had to be disabled again, and Freddy can now be stunned by his own dream pallets. They can't figure out major things, let alone something as (I would assume) intricate as a matchmaking system.
Also, quick aside to one of your other replies: You said that people do of course want to see their skill represented, but this is rather at odds with what Behaviour's intentions with this system are. Yet they keep calling it SKILL-BASED MATCHMAKING, which is of course going to compel players to want to see some quantification of the skill factor that is influencing the matchmaking. They completely botched it just in the terminology. It's like engineers make all the decisions without running things through a comms person that can make all of this palatable to a general audience. Goddamn Office Space up in here.
-
@Schardon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2483677#Comment_2483677
Again - Your experience withing 24 hours of MMR going live is not relevant. MMR needs to adjust itself (in every game) before working properly. We'll see if it'll work in DbD.
You should start to notice an effect of MMR after a decent amount of games. I'd say about 50-100. If the system really works.
It can't work within your first 10 games.
To be fair, Behaviour DID say during the last test that they were basing our initial MMR on match data they have been collecting for months, so there should be some ballpark accuracy at launch. We're not all just starting from zero.
-
@Schardon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2483602#Comment_2483602
That's fine, so am I but this is ultimately the wrong game to be competitive in.
I also enjoy seeing my skill represented by an emblem/rank in games that are not atrociously balanced. DbD is not one of them.
If you really are competitive your sense of "fun" should be that you're playing fair and balanced games which most of the time will be close matches. This is what MMR will or should do in the long run. Your experience withing 24 hours of MMR going live is not relevant. MMR needs to adjust itself (in every game) before working properly. We'll see if it'll work in DbD.
If your sense of fun is stomping worse players then you're not competitive but you like to see yourself as competitive.
Either way - MMR just got implemented. Let people play a few weeks for it to properly adjust. If it's still a mess in a few weeks/months then we have reasons to complain.
If people want to SEE their skill level represented they should not ask for better match making or MMR. None of those things visibly represent your skill level. The correct thing to ask for, in that case, would be a proper ranked mode.
A real ranked mode in DbD is more of a bad joke than what it's worth though imo.
Despite our butting heads in this thread, I agree with everything you've said here.
Although, you say "If it's still a mess in a few weeks/months then we have reasons to complain." What would we base that sentiment on though, exactly? We can't see or compare any sort of rank, and therefore we don't have any information (beyond gut feelings) to conclude that it is (or isn't) a mess.
-
@Schardon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2483283#Comment_2483283
And yet people in Overwatch, LoL, DotA, CS:GO, Valorant and every other competitive game with a ladder system STILL blame their team mates and call them "bad" and "wood elo" even though they should know they're roughly around the same skill level due to their visible league/rank.
Cognitive Dissonance and the Dunning Kruger effect exist and will remain in existence and plague every match making system there is.
I mean in LoL even existed a placebo "Report for bad skill" button for some time.. think about it...
It doesn't matter if people see their rankings/MMR. People will still blame other people for being bad or the match making for sucking balls because they got matched with donkeys even though those players have the same MMR / visible rank.
I'd even say the magnitude of this issue is one of the highest in DbD.
What you're saying about those games is absolutely true, but you can't solve for human nature -- which I think is what it boils down to, especially since video games are easy to make these kinds of excuses for, with little to no consequence.
But if there's an MMR system, yet we don't see any evidence of its existence in the game (via some sort of straight-up MMR number or league ranking system a la League of Legends or StarCraft II), then what's the point of Behaviour even telling us that it exists? Great, now there's a ranking system, but we can't see any of its impact. We can guess (from the outcome of individual matches and perceived teammate/opponent performance), but that's all we can do.
If I'm going to blame the game's matchmaking for this or that, I'd at least rather have a solid factual piece of information to pin it to, rather than my feelings and hunches. And I'd like some transparency into what actions impact it. I'd like to know whether I am getting better at the game or not. Otherwise, what's the point of having MMR? What was the point of even telling us that this is now the system?
@Schardon said:
It's there to provide better match making and thus a better and more fair game experience.
DBD is not a super competitive hardcore game like League of Legends or Counter Strike and it can't be without being completely reworked. You're not able to see your MMR because you're not supposed to chase after it. It's simply just sitting there for less stompy games.
I understand that most people don't see the point in that because everybody is so accustomed to "push that rating" of literally every other PvP game, but DBD is different. It's a far too casual and unbalanced game to be compared to other games and their match making / ranking systems.
EDIT: Also to respond to this... if it's not an appropriately competitive game, an Elo-esque rating doesn't seem well-suited to it. And if they just wanted less stompy games, then they should have quietly implemented this without saying anything. "You're not supposed to chase after it" -- give me a break, of course players are gonna want to chase after it. Again, solving for human nature, not a thing.
Heck, I'm not noticing any of my matches being any more or less stompy than they were before. But at least before this week, I had a rank that ebbed and flowed with my performance.
-
@ChurchofPig said:
BHVR is probably keeping us from knowing what influences mmr because they saw how well THAT went when they showed us what influenced pips for our rank. They needed a new system because they did that. Also, as others have said, it's harder to smurf with mmr which is a plus.
If they don't want us to know what kinds of stuff influences our ranking, that says everything about the ranking system. It basically sounds like another way of saying "This is bad, and we know it's bad, but we just don't really want to hear about it." There's something really wrong with that, no?
-
@lordfart said:
I dunno if it's the same for DBD but I play some FPS that don't show MMR so that it's harder for people to smurf. Could be a similar thing here idk.
Yeah, but in those games (like, say, Overwatch) there are leagues and brackets that give you a broad sense of where you stand in ranked play. Also, it's pretty obvious what contributes to your rating -- kills and victories. DBD is nebulous here, and has no leagues that give you a sense of how well you're playing. They could find some way to do it without showing you a flat number.
-
@Alice_pbg said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2483075#Comment_2483075
not when the target is not the issue. which it isn't.
What would you say the issue is that they are solving here?
-
@Alice_pbg said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2483032#Comment_2483032
when you have a bad match, you know the system messed up. You don't need a number.
and when it keeps happening, you know it has some bug. again, you don't need a number.
when did I say it's perfect? I'm saying showing a number is irrelevant.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2483033#Comment_2483033
people will just ignore the mistakes they made in the match and go "they have higher MMR, that's why I lost".
giving it a number just creates a target. it doesn't do anything for the players involved.
A target is better than a wild guess.
-
@wxnickxw said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2483008#Comment_2483008
Becuase the idea is to have people of similar skill play with you. By hiding the numbers when they it prevents people from reporting when the ranking system isn't working either becuasw they find they number not going up or down depending on play or being matched with wildly different numbered players.
Unless you think the devs have managed to produce something that isn't already broken or soon to be broken in which case boy are you in for a rude awaking if you keep playing. The devs are notorious for not being capable of fixing the bugs they have been told about let alone 6hose they are unaware of
Right.
If this is a good system that the devs are confident in, there's no reason to hide MMR information.
If it's a shaky system that maybe doesn't work as well as they want, it's going to be obvious anyway and they should just take their lumps instead of trying to hide it.
-
@Alice_pbg said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2482998#Comment_2482998
"my matches are too easy/hard" is a random unknowable factor? then giving it a number means nothing, because you are just following the number.
if people are wrong, people are wrong. people will complain either way.
People will just invent reasons in their head for why this is the case, why they did well or poorly, etc., especially when they have no solid information to base this one. A hard, factual number at least gives them something to hang all of this on. Yes, people will complain either way, but again I'd rather complain about something I don't have to 100% guess about.
-
@Alice_pbg said:
because your mmr is irrelevant. as long as you are getting good matches, why would it matter?
giving it a number will just make people go "look at this mess". and they will go "look at this mess" with ANY number showing, because people just want stuff to complain about.
Given the choice, I'd rather complain about hard data than random unknowable factors, because at least the hard data would focus their efforts.
All this is gonna do is make people wrongly assume that the new grades are still representative of your rank, and continue to complain about that, because it's the only number they can see. Nobody reads patch notes other than the really devoted players on forums and Reddit. We're already seeing tweets like this one, and I'm betting it's not gonna stop.
-
@CluelessWanderer said:
Yeah, I don't get it either. My matchmaking has given better quality team mates, which is nice, but at the same time, I can't help but miss striving for something.
Right, I'm happy with that part -- if they did indeed figure it out, then that's great. I just want to understand where my teammates and I sit, in the grand scheme of things. If things are going as swimmingly as they'd hoped, I don't get why there's all this secrecy around displaying an MMR number, or why they won't tell us why there's all this secrecy.
I'm as annoyed about the fact that they won't acknowledge the secrecy, as I am about the actual secrecy.
-
@Zozzy said:
If everyone is a winner then the balance problems don't matter... right?
It definitely feels like a bit of a "Let's give players a convenient scapegoat to feed their egos, and let them assume they got matched with low-MMR teammates if they do badly, or assume they are badass high-MMR players when they do well" solution, as if people aren't gonna see through that like a piece of cellophane wrap.
-
@TwitchyMike said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2479032#Comment_2479032
Than they should really evaluate themselves. With those facts it's pretty apparent.
Yeah, I wish. I've been playing this game for about 3 years; I figure if something was gonna dramatically change, it would have happened by now.
-
@TwitchyMike said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2479000#Comment_2479000
Then why are people saying they're a small game company? Hmm then I redact my saying on them being a small game company. But everything else I say holds water. Note I'm not defending nor attacking BHVR. Just using this forum and this game as an example of content/products coming out unfinished. So if anything what you say makes me more inclined to agree with you and that there should be no excuse for BHVR's lack of good content coming out.
It's because people have mythologized this idea that Behaviour is some little developer. They may have been at one time, but they're not now. They will celebrate their 30th anniversary next year, and they've developed a lot of games, and made a lot of money off Dead By Daylight.
And no, there's no excuse for this. There's no reason I should be able to go to their Twitter account on the launch day of a new DLC pack and reliably expect to see a bunch of issues of the magnitude of the ones I am seeing today. There's no reason they can't catch this kind of stuff before launch; to me, it's a sign that their PTB windows and pre-launch QA periods need to be longer, but for some reason they won't budge on changing their process, even though this KEEPS. HAPPENING.
-
@TwitchyMike said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/277982/this-is-not-normal
Ya even though they're a smaller game company the people at the top are loaded and could hire some more staff and actually have a team that fits the demand for this game.
Behaviour Interactive has 600+ employees, and is the self-described largest independent game developer and publisher in Canada. As I type this, Dead By Daylight is the 9th most-played game on Steam (per Steamcharts), it's in the top 10 of all games being played on Twitch at this moment, and only two months ago it had its highest peak player count of all-time on Steam.
Stop with the sob stories. Behaviour is not some scrappy upstart company. They are well-capitalized, well-staffed, and yet still unable to conduct a smooth DLC launch five years in. Just today, they've had to disable the RPD map, the new killer is causing random disconnects, and Freddy's dream pallets can stun him. It's always two steps forward, one step back.
They don't listen to (and do not want) external feedback, they aren't transparent about anything, and they have repeatedly demonstrated that they don't have a firm grasp on the things that are wrong with their game. They can't/won't fix their screwy code base that leads to the type of issues listed above, they will never forsake a few almighty dollars for an aggressive game health update cycle (or two), and they have no incentive to ever change this outlook because in spite of everything I typed in the last two paragraph, the things in paragraph #1 continue to remain true.
-
@Seraphor said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2469044#Comment_2469044
That's never been possible with rank reset because everyone gets deranked, so you're still facing the same level of players, who play extra sweaty to climb back up to the rank they were previously. Unless you stopped playing for a week to let them all catch back up, in which case, you ended up being barred from the game for a week, so there's no good result there. Rank resets have always been a nightmare.
I'm patient, so yes, this has always worked out fine for me. I tend to mostly play survivor these days anyway, and I leave my killer play for specific challenge-guided stuff.
-
I like being able to get easier killer games after rank reset, because it's the only thing that makes the more ridiculous tome challenges tolerable/feasible. With SBMM, that goes out the window.
I hope they compensate by making all challenges easier/more pedestrian, without high bars or weird specific perk requirements.
Also, those BP rewards are pathetic. 250k for getting to rank 1? Yeah, add another zero onto that highest-end reward, maybe. Why is Behaviour so frigging stingy with BP?
-
@BlackRabies said:
All I'm seeing here is a mess of text. You're really complaining about this challenge? This is nothing, this is something easily obtained from normal game play and it's SAFE unhooks. I think this promotes healthier play from survivors waiting for the killer to leave instead of dive bombing the hooks.
This is an easy challenge there's plenty others far worse that you have to throw the game to get.
I am not complaining about the difficulty of the challenge. Like you and @SirGando point out, yes, Borrowed Time facilitates easy safe unhooks and all that. The terms of the challenge, as far as an individual survivor getting it done, are fine.
I was complaining about the broader effect that it has, in terms of every single survivor in a match bum-rushing every hook and every injured teammate, at the expense of everything else in the match. I've played probably four games today, and literally 100% of survivors are playing in stupid ways in the name of getting this challenge done. My post was about questioning whether Behaviour considers how players interact with video games, and the effect that these types of tactics have. I dunno how the initial post could have been more clear.
-
@GentlemanFridge said:
Thought you meant the in-game hammer item, and imagined various killers wildly flailing about with a hammer twice the size of their head, complete with chiptune theme.
I wouldn’t be against it, but my completionist side wouldn’t let me use them, ever.
Eh, to each their own. Smash never MAKES you use hammers, but they are there for those truly insane challenges, if you really want to skip them. To me, it's a video game, so these aren't really accomplishments anyway. I'm more eager to just toss out the stuff that I feel is aggressively not respecting my time.
Also, now I want a hammer item like you described too, just have Hillbilly hammering survivors into SPACE.
-
"SBMM is a new type of matchmaking that uses a hidden skill rating instead of ranks to create fairer matches. This rating increases when you do well and decreases when you do poorly."
BHVR, nobody trusts you to get this right. For all we know, you could just be hiding ranks, changing literally nothing, and then claiming everything is working as intended. It's really convenient that it is totally invisible, we have no measurement of what our rank is and how it is rising and falling, and we just have to take your word for it. You won't even tell us what factors into this system. Why even have it at all, if there is absolutely zero transparency? Why can't you guys be transparent about ANYTHING?
-
You must DC a lot if you got slapped with a five-hour ban. Maybe stop doing that, and then an errant crash won't have such a massive impact on you in the future?
I've also been DC'd by a game crash or something else out of my control, and I know it sucks. But the game can't differentiate between whether it was an action you took or an action out of your control. If it did try to differentiate, people would find ways to game that system.
Also: "There needs to be better incentives to keep players from DCing. Examples, match ending immediately if a DC occurs." No, there does not need to be an attempt to placate serial DCers. You just shouldn't do it. If you decide you're going to play Dead by Daylight, then play Dead by Daylight, don't DC.
-
Yes, yes you are.
-
Pffffft the Master sucks, get Angelus or Spike or Drusilla in there.
-
I dunno what to say, other than that those creators you are describing sound like the ones who are being condescending.
@not_Queen was being sincere and straightforward. I know there is a lot of justifiable stuff to criticize the developers for, but history shows that they are right to be a little bit gun-shy about talking possible future plans, because everyone is so quick to go on the attack. Yes, that's the normal acrimonious relationship between game developers and their hardcore forum communities, but from the developer's perspective, I'm sure it's hard to constantly be told by your audience that what you're doing sucks and is bad.
I absolutely believe that the developers work hard, and they want to take pride in the thing that they are making, they want people to enjoy it, and they don't want to make us unhappy or feel that they have dropped the ball. They are conditioned to walk on eggshells with discussing early plans or proposed changes, because they're human and they don't want their fans to immediately start telling them how bad and stupid and wrong they are. So, cut them some slack here. They aren't being "condescending" or "cringe." They're just being human. They have feelings, and like most normal people they want their effort to be valued.
I try to be constructive with feedback, and I encourage everyone else to do the same. It's cool that they decided to share this Object of Obsession remake idea with us and invite the forum community into the conversation. If this goes really sideways, well, this is your answer next time you're like "wHy DoEsN't BeHaViOuR eVeR lIsTeN tO tHe CoMmUnItY???"
It seems like the discussion here has been pretty level-headed at any rate, so far.
-
EDIT: Oops, I'll post other feedback here later. What I had said here before, was based on a misunderstood read of part of this perk's functionality. Nothing to see here!