Rydog
Rydog
About
- Username
- Rydog
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,015
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Zozzy said:
Can't fix this issue without red rank survivors waiting 30 minutes for a match.
We need more killer players and less swf.
Cross-play was supposed to fix this very issue.
EDIT: Also, a lot more high-level players would probably be incentivized to play killer if they weren't forced to pick between the same 2-3 killers in order to have a chance.
-
I would definitely like to see Decisive Strike deactivate when a survivor jumps in a locker -- the whole "I dare you" game that it creates is more than a little bit lame, not to mention counterintuitive to how a survivor should be acting with the killer right on top of them.
It's good that it is an anti-tunneling perk -- it is really important for the game to have strong anti-tunneling and anti-camping tools, because things that prevent players from actively engaging in the game for long stretches at a time are awful -- but it lasts way longer than it needs to. It needs to last just long enough to let a survivor make a clean getaway from (or stun) a killer that is tunneling them off the hook, but not long enough to make the survivor go "cool, free invincibility."
Borrowed Time is what, 15 seconds? Why don't they make Decisive Strike last the same amount of time?
-
@Bardon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1865075#Comment_1865075
I know, as I said in my previous answer my post refers to much more than just the UI.
Hence this part of my post:
"Personally, I'd be happy if the devs spent 6 months fixing outstanding issues and held off on any new content for that timeframe. The rate they release new content has got to be punishing for the dev/testing team and the ever-increasing amount of issues is a real disincentive to play."
Yeah, this game really could use a Rainbow Six: Siege "Operation Health" style development cycle where they just stop working on new chapter content and address issues that have been outstanding for years. People have been saying this for a very long time, but Behaviour has never acknowledged it or talked publicly about this idea, so they will probably just keep ignoring it no matter how often it gets brought up.
On the bright side, a lot of these map refreshes, etc. are intended to improve overall game balance while also giving the game a bit of a visual update, and I think that has been pretty successful for the most part. I'd really like to see this accompanied by Behaviour fully falling on their sword and skipping a chapter cycle for comprehensive bugfixes, though.
-
@Bardon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1865068#Comment_1865068
The UI was just an example, hopefully you read the rest of my post.
Most game studios have multidisciplinary teams that work on different aspects of a game independently of other teams. One team working on the UI/UX has no capacity to fix bugs, nor would they presumably leech resources from the developers whose job it is to fix bugs.
-
UI/UX team and balance team are different.
There are myriad reasons to improve a game's usability, especially as it pertains to surfacing information better and tamping down on new player churn. You don't think about it because you are already knee-deep in the game, but bad UX is one of DBD's most serious problems, and it's good that they are finally taking some baby steps toward addressing it (although, I am not a fan of the screen placement choices they have apparently made for the new HUD).
-
BOOM.
-
I, too, wish they would fix the bad server tick rate.
-
I'm assuming they will move on to a comprehensive killer animation refresh after they push the upcoming new survivor movement animations out.
-
@GbyeDinah said:
Thanks “team mate” .... I really appreciate saving you a few times for you to squat on me and shine the flashlight for the doctor to find me. Real nice.
edited to remove players name...
Sounds like working with the killer to me, this is reportable behavior. If other players are intentionally showing the killer where you are, blocking you in to force you to take a hit, etc., you should report it.
-
@Mister_Holdout said:
I don't bother with Nurse anymore because having to wait for two cooldowns is asinine.
Maybe one day the devs will make Nurse fun again.
I don't understand why the devs are so eager to add some sort of power cooldown mechanic to every killer they rework.
-
This guy.
-
I think this is a good buff. But yes, Wraith struggles too much with map pressure, and his kit could use a bigger built-in run speed while he is cloaked.
-
I think people would probably give you feedback, yes.
-
@Crowman said:
Or maybe we could not try to invent a problem where there is no problem. Leatherface cosmetics are honestly a non-issue.
If they were a non-issue, we wouldn't routinely see threads like this.
-
@EvanSnowWolf said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1864883#Comment_1864883
I am. I love it. It is the only map set in a town. I love the buildings, the bushes, the backyards. Springwood is CLOSE, but not quite.
I am sick of having like 5 flavors of Autohaven, or all those Coldwind maps. Or those outdoorsey maps that go on forever like Red Forest.
I love Haddonfield.
#SORRYNOTSORRY
What you're expressing love for here is the theme though, not the arrangement or gameplay considerations of the map. I, too, like the neighborhood theme, and the fact that this street from Halloween is an arena in this game. But they can retain that look and feel while improving the gameplay. My hope is that they can rebalance some of the annoying pieces of it, and maybe do a Springwood-esque thing where there are a handful of variations.
-
@Chchchcheryl said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1864831#Comment_1864831
The creation of black face in itself was to mock black people (I understand it now has other social issues and limitations, but talking in context)
Leatherface wearing a person of colour's skin is not blackface in any effect.
Now, what is black face is players wearing the person of colour's skin (Claudette's in this case) to create a racist commentary. This is, in context, 100% black face!
Also, it 100% is in character for Leatherface to wear her skin, he's severely mentally ill/disabled (I can never remember sorry), he wouldn't even be able to comprehend the idea of racism, so it's not in character for the player to be racist wearing Claudette's skin!
Now, in effect there is no way to tackle this short of partnering with valve to target people with rude and or racist display names, and putting filters in their chat to detect slurs and offensive phrases (which they should already have), which would be automatically reported, additionally any reports with words like racist (and in context, homophobic, (and the like)) being sent to a direct bin for immediate, heavy concern, review!
Now the OPs suggested change to make custom aprons and/or accessories can be determined absolutely, in two ways.
Either as absolute genius (which is my view), as it prevents racist behaviour, whilst still creating the idea of the survivor mementos, this also lines up with his halloween housewife skin, as he takes her clothes as well and dresses in them (Though he does wear her face).
Or
Really ######### racist! Denying the wearing of a person of colour's skin (even if with others) to circumvent racism, in itself could be seen as racist, now idk why it would, but someone pointed out (to a lesser effect) taking her trophy head away (and not the others) would be racist. But in some views taking all of it away to avoid racism would also be racist!
I don't know how BHVR could ever avoid this, so please forgive that (and my needless info dump).
(Also this is quoted because this reply was originally targeted as a reply, but ended out as a general statement info dump, sorry quotee).
Maybe -- and bear with me here -- they could remove this whole mechanic and these cosmetics.
-
The Balanced Landing situation has already been largely addressed by tying BL's stagger reduction effect to its cooldown, so you can't just infinite the killer all day on Haddonfield anymore.
I dunno why they haven't prioritized this map, but I think that when they do, the major thing that needs changing is all the really narrow corridors that run alongside the houses. Open up those areas more, so that the killer has more opportunities to head off survivors instead of just chasing them in a straight line all game.
-
@Chilli_man2400 said:
They should buff lucky break by making it like iron will so while injured you leave no pools of blood until your healed this would make it great cause there’s no limitations just get injured and the perk activates permanently
This would be a great buff.
And, I really don't think it would be some massive game-changer. I still have a hard time following blood trails as killer; the scoring event is more of a tip-off to me than the actual blood pools are.
-
...so does anyone know the answer to my question? 😄
Those who main Zarina and/or have played both extensively, how quiet is Zarina compared to Kate?
-
Cue "BUTTTTTTTT HE'S A CHARAAAAAAAAARACTER THIS IS WHAT THE CHAAAAAAAAAAAARACTER WOULD DOOOOOOOOOOOO IT'S IN CHAAAAAAAAAAARACTERRRRRRRRRRRR FOR HIM."
Newsflash: Leatherface is not a real person, he was written by someone. When you have a character, and the character is acting in problematic ways, that can and should be an issue for the creator. This game isn't a cohesive narrative that its creator is using to make some sort of considered commentary or statement on something, it is a video game that lets the player wear what amounts to blackface.
-
Decisive Strike!
-
@TheDappaScrappa said:
First off I'm not here for none of that us vs them mentality on this post. I just have a question and hopefully I can get a real answer from a few people here.
With that being said I have one question I want to ask (and no I'm not some salty "enter role here" player complaining its just a real question). For the most part when a perk comes out that changes the killers meta (like ruin/undying, ruin/pop, this or that) why do these perks get nerfed for being used too much or being too good. But when there are survivor sided perks that are used in pretty much every match ( Unbreakable/DS/Sprint Burst) they rarely get changed (or at least in a drastic way) to pretty much change the survivors meta perks?
Yes, yes I know it sounds like an us vs them question but I'm not coming from side. I am just curious to see if anybody else could fill me in on your opinion on it. And yes I am aware that DS has been changed before and BL has been too but I never said survivor meta perks never get changed, I just said rarely. This isn't about me complaining about the undying changes, it is just me asking a legit question and want to hear others opinions.
And no I'm not a rank 1 survivor or rank 1 killer tbh the highest survivor rank i got was 4 and highest killer rank I got was around 4-5. Please keep it a civil discussion. No "small peepee" build trash talking, once again I am just curious to know what other people think
The real answer to your question is 100% an Occam's razor situation.
It's simply that Behaviour is excessively metric-driven, and they look at data that says stuff long the lines of:
- "Hex: Undying is used in X% of matches, and results in Y% of killer wins, which blows way past our Z% target threshold. Therefore, it needs to be adjusted."
- "Decisive Strike is used in X% of matches, and results in Y% of survivor wins, which is within the Z% target threshold. Therefore, it is fine."
Behaviour is really, REALLY bad at seeing or understanding the emotional, human angle of why something is frustrating or excessive. They approach everything like engineers, and their approach to balance is way too robotic. Look at how long it took them to adjust the effect of Memento Mori offerings, and that involved nothing more than changing a number.
-
@Moundshroud said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1864706#Comment_1864706
My problem with what has been inferred so far is that it seems to be less about matchmaking and more about making sure we can't check their work or call them out on doing an poor job of it. It has been implied (although they may prove me wrong and show the metrics that count and how they are measured) that we won't know how MMR works to keep anyone from trying to "game" the system. That is nonsense. All anyone has to do to game the system, whether they know what metrics are tracked or not, is throw games. It is as simple as that. So their implied reasoning for keeping secrets is a miscalculation at best, and a falsehood at worst.
There is no good reason not to tell us the metrics MMR is using and how it works other than to obfuscate the process so we can't say, "it isn't working." We will just have to have faith, and chalk that curb stomping we gave or received to us just playing well. Surely those people should have been playing us, the MMR said so. Rank means nothing soon, since there will be Red Rank Potatoes just as their will be Red Rank Sharks. Do you follow?
I'm not a tinfoil hat kind of guy, who spouts conspiracies, nor am I a guy that is negative on Behavior. They have treated me well in all our interactions and overall I enjoy the game. That doesn't mean I won't call out something sketchy when I see it. They need to elucidate us on how MMR works, what it measures, and when it is set in motion. If they won't, they need to give us a good reason why they can't. Saying people will sandbag if they know the metrics doesn't cut the mustard; as I've already pointed out all one has to do to sandbag one's rating is choose to lose games.
Agreed.
An MMR system is pretty useless if we don't understand what contributes to that MMR. Like, it might as well just be some fake made-up number if we have no grasp on how to improve it. The whole idea of MMR is to gauge and matchmake based on skill, and that would lead a reasonable player to want to take steps to improve their skill. We have to know what the steps are, though.
I've said this a couple of times already, but at bare minimum, every player's MMR number needs to be visible, even if it's only on the post-match screen. Otherwise, they will always have a perception problem of players assuming that the current rank numbers/color bands are what influences the matchmaking. The 99.9% of players who don't read forums/social media/patch notes/game news will continue to go "Why do I keep getting matched with and/or against people 10 ranks higher/lower than me? Matchmaking is so broken!"
Look at how other games do it. League of Legends has a hidden MMR number, but it groups players into leagues (bronze, silver, gold, etc.) based on their match performance, and they are in a pool with other players in that league. StarCraft II is similar, I believe, and Overwatch, and so on. Why can't DBD function the same way, in terms of turning the (current) ranks into strict leagues that correlate with MMR to some degree? If you're gonna have two different numbers, they better work together (especially if one is invisible) or you will have nothing but confusion.
EDIT: Also, as @ScottJund pointed out in one of his videos, an MMR system is likely to torpedo high-level content creator play, because it will result in super-long queue times with the same super-small pool of people, who will probably only ever use the same handful of perks and the same 2-3 killers in every match. There are a lot of problems with MMR that a game like DBD is going to struggle to address.
-
@Lycidas said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1864613#Comment_1864613
And do you think that maybe something like an in-game explanation of how each emblem works and how you gain points for it might be useful?
It might help player who don't look up how stuff works, which is always nice
I do think there needs to be some clear information in the game itself, yes. The emblem mouseovers post-match are super-vague and do not paint a picture of what is contributing to those emblems. I've played this game for more than two years, and I still had to make a spreadsheet to keep it all straight in my head.
-
@Lycidas said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1864571#Comment_1864571
If that was the case slugging might become a massive problem since a killer can slug 4 survivors and always get Devout iridescent, which feels wrong
I think the only "problem" of the Devout emblem is that you rely on survivors being at least a little bit altruistic with hook saves to get iridescent quality, but it's not completely busted IMHO, I usually get gold or iridescent as long as I don't camp the hooks
Yeah, I understand why things like survivors bleeding out aren't rewarded. The problem is that the entire emblem system is a big ball of arcane exceptions to intuitive goalposts.
-
@DawnMad said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1864571#Comment_1864571
Emblem system on a whole is awful at it's job to be honest, which is measuring skill. I hope they rework most of them when they do the rank reward stuff.
My emblem system rework:
SURVIVOR:
- Did you die?
KILLER:
- How many survivors did you kill?
(OK, I'm being a little cheeky and I understand the need for SOME granularity to curb dead weight survivors etc., but this should be the foundation of everything.)
-
@DawnMad said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1864525#Comment_1864525
An addition to this, 9 hooks means at least either 1:2:3:3 or 2:2:2:3 set of hooks. So if you kill someone on first hook make sure at least 2 of them doesn't hit stage 2 or die on hook. And if everyone dies on 2nd hook you don't get this either.
It's so baffling that the logic is not just "Dead survivor = 3 hook states" in all cases where a survivor dies or leaves the game, for emblem hook-counting purposes. The emblem system is so bad and counterintuitive.
-
@Moxie said:
Just wondering.
Because two survivors running BT are going to be twice as helpful, in theory?
-
Another person getting unnecessarily triggered by other people moving their character a certain way.
The crouch key is not toxic. You are applying that definition to it. It is the most low-effort "trolling" a player can do, and if it wasn't that, players would find another character motion to mean "I am taunting you." Stop letting it have the exact effect on you that they want it to have, chase them out of the gate, and move on.
-
Emblem system in a nutshell. I really wish it made more intuitive sense.
-
Not even a choice. Oni 100%.
-
@MissKitty95 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1863871#Comment_1863871
I believe they are getting other surviours to help them into making my game bad .ie to not help revive me if I’m down or on hook, I’ve been left multiple games to bleed out no1 has come to recover me, only I have been chased and hooked while my team is left to survive and escape with a hair not touched on the body, literally no1 else has been hooked or hit
I feel there Intentionally going out there way to make my games a bad time, I don’t kno , I’ve played this game a longgg time this isn’t your usual “ toxic gameplay” seems to be abit more then just that, I feel like I’m being ingame targeted or something :( I havnt experienced this before that’s why I came to here to ask if it’s a thing or if im going mad, it’s just funny that every game that seems to go that way recently has been the exact same person,
I'd definitely report it using the in-game tool if you're getting trolled repeatedly by the same person. They should be able to look at your match history using their internal tools and identify a pattern, if one indeed exists.
How does that even happen? I never get matched with the same teammates repeatedly.
-
@MissKitty95 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1863862#Comment_1863862
thanks for replying it’s not so much chat it’s in the game itself I believe I am being targeted by another player
Targeted in what way?
If a fellow survivor is actively helping the killer find you, or another player is intentionally blocking you into an area in an effort to hold the match hostage, you should report that.
-
If people are saying prejudiced or harmful things in chat, etc., then you should report it using the in-game report tool at the end of the match. It will send a chat log to the customer support team. I'm sure you can imagine the kinds of things people would say that would certainly qualify as harassment!
-
Yeah, good idea, tamp down on people playing with their friends. I can't think of a single reason why this would be unhealthy for the matchmaking queues and really disincentivizing playing this game.
-
The new information it presents is great. The placement choices are strange, and I would prefer that everything stays in the lower-third so that you can scan it easily. I dunno why they decided to move everything.
-
OP acknowledges Nurse as the hardest killer to learn and master, and then calls her an "insta easy mode" in the same sentence. Like, which is it? Both of those things cannot be true simultaneously.
If I'm playing Street Fighter II against, say, Daigo Umehara -- arguably the greatest Street Fighter player who has ever lived, and who has clocked thousands of hours of playing Ryu -- is it "insta easy mode" when he beats me easily, even though he has put in the time and effort to master this thing? This is maybe a slightly lopsided comparison, but still, to excel at Nurse you really have to put in a lot of time practicing with her, and you have to know how to read survivors really well. She's one of the few killers who has a very strong return on that investment. I never get angry when I go against a good Nurse who completely destroys everyone, because that player more-or-less earned the victory long before this match occurred. This is the nature of competitive activities.
Also, I dunno what this clip is even supposed to demonstrate. She hooked someone and then beelined toward you, and you didn't even make a minimal effort to relocate or evade her. I kept waiting for her to go insta-down four people in a row or something, but all I saw was someone who knew she was coming and then eagerly offered her their neck.
-
@Moxie said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1862476#Comment_1862476
Yeah, 128 M is practically the entire map. Furthers my point, why bother add this restriction?
Good points on nerfing/buffing. They are scared of making strong perks. Not sure why. Buffing these niche perks will still never make them meta (unless it is an entire perk rework) but at least it would make them more tempting/useable.
Practically speaking, this distance "restriction" was probably always how Empathy functioned from the get-go, and they just changed the language in the perk description to make it conform more closely to how everything else is described.
-
@Woot1234 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1863287#Comment_1863287
I never understood the preference of Whispers over Spies from the Shadows. Whispers is nice as you don't need crows and can be good to find the last survivor urban evading around the map during EGC. But you don't know where the person is outside of the general area. Crows, on the other hand reveals direction.
Pretty much what @SilentPill said. The thing about Whispers is that it also tells you, reliably, where survivors AREN'T. So, you can run in the general proximity of a generator without going up to check it, know definitively that no one is in the area, and move on to the next generator. It makes your sweeps more efficient. And for slower-moving killers like Huntress especially, that can be a big boon. Also, if there's one survivor left, Whispers is often a death sentence because it tells you when they are or aren't going for a specific door. And it helps with locker guesswork, when you know there is a survivor in the area (because a gen has just been worked on or whatever).
I do think Spies from the Shadows is a very underrated perk, but not quite as reliable (and some maps just don't have as many crows).
-
@RamblinRango said:
Just use lightweight and sprint everywhere, that's big brain
I do this, except without Lightweight. :D
-
@kaeXo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1863282#Comment_1863282
Not really, you rarely got more than two uses out of it. So if what HR_Helios says is true I guess it’s not much of a change. And if you think that’s broken, wait till you find out about Myers.
Hahahaha, yeah, who's this "Myers" character I keep hearing about??? He just stands there and looks at me!
-
What if Trapper didn't have to pick his power up off the floor constantly?
Also, they were talking about some sort of start-of-game preparation phase like a year ago, but none of these ideas ever come to fruition.
-
@lowiq said:
What was the point of urban evasion before the fixated buff?
LOL, +1 to this.
-
I would work Whispers in there. It's a common perk that is available to all killers, and it is really helpful for finding people. Pop and BBQ are my two other go-to perks, and either Discordance or Tinkerer is my usual fourth perk on a general build.
-
There is a significant learning curve to playing killer. I remember, in my first few matches, I could barely even find survivors, let alone down or hook them. You're starting out with zero game sense or map knowledge on this front, and you just have to go through that climb. It's hard. I suggest learning the ropes with Wraith, since his power is very forgiving in terms of usually buying you a little bit of space to find survivors. He's also simple and forces you to learn the basics of chasing, as he has no real gimmicks. I'd switch to someone else once you get comfortable, because he's not that great against good players. You mentioned Spirit and Legion; Spirit is amazing but takes a lot of game sense and solid prediction to excel with, and Legion's power teaches you weird habits and is frankly just sort of counterintuitive to performing well as killer.
I also recommend trying out perks like Whispers and Spies from the Shadows (both common perks that any killer can find on the Bloodweb), as they are very valuable survivor locating tools. I cannot play most killers without Whispers.
As far as dealing with toxic survivors... I dunno what else to say other than, don't let them get to you. People do a lot of low-effort trolling in this game, but they are just trying to frustrate you, so don't let them. Focus on your play, and you will improve.
-
@kaeXo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1862691#Comment_1862691
Yes. Some insight is I like to run a Hag build consisting of Undying, HG, MYC, and Corrupt. Even tho there is no Ruin you have to respect the possibility of Devour, especially on a Hag. Also generally if players see a lit totem they typically cleanse it. Corrupt intervention gives you early game set up and some gen defense. And if the survivors choose to play passive and look for totems it leads them down the path of finding HG. Undying respawns HG and then there’s the possibility they cleanse it again not knowing I have undying, or thinking it’s Devour, or just simply cleansing a lit totem because they see one. If things go to plan with this and you get use out of MYC things really begin to snowball downhill for them. You could also run Ruin or Devour and make them choose between possibly cleansing Ruin/Devour or HG but then you’re taking up 3/5 totems, leaving little room for them to transfer to another dull totem of cleansed.
Oof. This seems really broken and unintended in conjunction with Haunted Ground. Daisy-chained exposed status via the Undying jump, I don't see how anyone could look at that and not go "yeah, that might be a little much."
-
@Xayrlen I have done some Googling and I assume you are referring to this, VentureBeat's hands-on gameplay footage of Cuphead from Gamescom 2017:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=848Y1Uu5HtkYou're being a bit unfair here, because this isn't even a game review. It's a journalist playing an early build of a game on the show floor of a convention. I'm well-aware of what a show like Gamescom looks like for a journalist (I covered E3 in a professional capacity for 12 years), and you cannot reasonably expect someone to have a full grasp on a game they are seeing for the first time, that they are just there to capture early preview footage for on a show floor, when they inevitably have a 30-minute window before they get cut off and/or have to move on to their next appointment.
Again, this is not a game review, it's just some footage. They even specify in the video description that this person was the only one there covering the show for this outlet (and given that this is just VentureBeat and they had to travel all the way to Germany for it, that stretched-thin budget does not surprise me at all). And also, that he's not well-versed in platformers. And they poke fun at the fact that he's not great at it, they're not hiding that or trying to claim otherwise. But this isn't even a critique, it's just direct capture footage from a convention floor. So yeah, you apparently don't even know what you're criticizing here.
-
Or, even better, could there just be no input option whatsoever? Treat it just like first hook, except you cannot make an escape attempt, and all you can do is wait for someone to rescue you. Mash-to-struggle is a bad and severely outdated mechanic that needs to go.
-
@Xayrlen said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1860060#Comment_1860060
What you are saying is a complete nonsense. Taking in consideration mentioned by you Cuphead, that game journalist had no credibility whatsoever because that practise level was not hard at all. What that journalist gave us was not a review, but misinformation, since he didn't even read instructions until he failed 10+ times and made it look like this game was incredibly hard. I would never listen to someone who tries to tell you about something he has no idea about, especially in criticism.
So no, I completely disagree with you. And I would rather see rough and plain truth from someone who knows what he does, instead of a glorified article from a person who never commits to his doings. We saw that kind of attitude everywhere today, The Last of Us Part 2 is a prime evidence to that.
I'm just using Cuphead as my example because it's the game you mentioned. I have no idea what the circumstances around this particular thing are -- what/where this coverage was, whether it was a game review, just some gameplay B-roll, a hands-on preview, or whatever. With a difficult game (and different people have different experience in terms of what they find difficult), any number of things could be a roadblock depending on what the coverage arrangement was. If it was a game review, then yeah, of course I'd expect the reviewer's criticism to come from somewhere measured and non-shallow; what I'm saying is that the perspective of "this is really hard and I could not beat it and here's why" has value on its own, because some readers are likely to share that experience, too.
Again, I have no idea what specific Cuphead coverage you're referring to or what the hoopla over it is; I was just pulling that game out because you had mentioned it previously. It's a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison with DBD since it is a single-player game that averages about 10 hours to beat its main story (but it's a good touchstone for talking about how the more difficult games end up getting covered).
-
Any or all of these things, in concert, would help a great deal.
- Decouple perks from the Bloodweb. Every time a character levels up, give that character a Perk Token that they can then spend to purchase any one perk of their choice, from those that have been unlocked. I really think this is THE solution. This would not devalue the Bloodweb (since it would still be critical for all the other non-perk stuff), it would retain the incentive to level characters up, and it would give players WAY WAY more agency in targeting the perks that they want to use. It would HUGELY help for trying out new killers without having to commit all your resources, only to discover that you don't really like that killer after all.
- Condense all perks into a single tier. Or alternatively, when a perk is unlocked (i.e. the teachable version from the Bloodweb), give every single character tier 1 of that perk. This would cut down on the grind and give players a chance to get the perks they want on the characters they play without having to rely on massive RNG and grinding.
- Lower the level threshold for unlocking a character's teachable perks. Instead of 30-35-40, it ought to be something like 15-20-25. This would give players a more reasonable goalpost when they are just simply trying to unlock perks and put together a decent build.
- Raise the BP cap by some significant amount. Make it 5,000,000 or something. I assume that it is theoretically capped to prevent the impact of hacking, but it seems arbitrary to me (since, I dunno, wouldn't hackers just keep giving themselves BP anyway?). A higher cap would allow people to bank more BP for future chapters.
- Do not clear a character's perk inventory when you prestige them -- only their items, add-ons, and offerings. This would immediately make prestiging a character a tempting prospect, instead of the monumental waste of time and BP that it is now.
- Have a regular, monthly double BP weekend. I dunno why this isn't a thing already. It would give everyone a regular event to look forward to.
I also think the game is barreling toward an inevitable come-to-Jesus "perk logic" crisis, because there are currently 164 total perks in the game, with another 24 being added every year. This is a system that is getting crushed under its own weight. There needs to be a purge of super-useless perks, and maybe a rethink in terms of how perks are introduced (like maybe each new character has one new perk instead of three). I'd rather have a smaller pool of more meaningful perks than the absolute swamp of bad ones we have now.
Also, Behaviour is broadly way too stingy with BP. Just give people more BP.