Seiko300
Seiko300
About
- Username
- Seiko300
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,323
- Last Active
Comments
-
When people talk about Boon: totems, I've realized more often than not they're really only addressing Circle of Healing specifically, rather than the actual strength of Boon totems as a whole. Circle of Healing is undoubtedly the strongest and the least balanced, but the other boons that exist so far like Shadow Step or Exponential are reasonably balanced out between the effects they provide and the time investment required to set them up beforehand.
As far as the idea of snuffing out boon totems permanently goes, there are FAR many more interesting ways to balance out both Circle of Healing, and Boon totems as a whole, rather than treating them exactly like their Hex: Counterparts. Because they aren't at all like they're hex: counterparts and a few distinct differences separate their balancing philosophy- it's exactly like comparing Hillbilly to Leatherface "because they both have chainsaws!" and stubbornly INSISTING this superficial similarity means they should be treated as identical when they're clearly not.
Here are a list of interesting changes that could apply to either boons as a whole, or to circle of healing specifically.
Range reduction.
- The most obvious and straightforward solution, a large part of the issue regarding boon totems (but specifically and especially Circle of Healing) is that their effects cover far too sizable an area of the map, especially when multiple survivors are running Boon totems you can essentially blanket nearly every active zone of the map. A capability which directly contrasts the original "small safe haven" idea that boons were originally created around. This has less to do with the issue of covering vertical space as well, which is more of a strategic quirk, and more to do with the sheer radius that Boons remain active in. Reducing their range from 24m to 16m (perhaps even 12 meters if the devs are feeling bold) and would go a long way in solving these issues.
- This may be relative to individual perks. Perks like Circle of Healing are far too strong with such increased range, but perks like Shadow Step or Boon: Exponential rely almost exclusively on greater ranges to be of any use.
Totem/Perk Cooldown.
- Because Boon totems are limited by their range and setup time, they are granted the exchange of replenish-ability- this is a core component of their balance. That being boons can be reset an infinite number of times, but always at the expense of time which could have been spent accomplishing objectives like generators or saving hooked teammates. However managing expenditures in time is made easier when a single survivor can immediately re-bless a dull totem after it has been snuffed out by a killer. This is especially difficult for a killer who may need to take balance the time of cleansing multiple Boon Totems placed by multiple survivors. Providing a cooldown to boon totems will limit their active use during a match, and can be done by either a traditional cooldown system placed on the perk itself which sets it on cooldown after the associated blessed totem has been cleansed (IE 90 second cooldown). Or instead, by preventing a specific totem that has recently been blessed from being blessed again for a slightly shorter duration- that affects all survivors in the trial (IE 60 second cooldown). For example if one survivor had their totem cleansed, that same survivor or any other survivor would not be able to bless that exact same totem again themselves.
More distinct audio cue.
- Boon totems were originally created around the idea of providing a temporary breathing space for survivors- as opposed to a Hex's constant map-wide pressure. To facilitate this, "soft chimes" were added to not only allow killers awareness of a Boon being active, but the general space in which they were active as well. However, due to the complexity of certain maps, as well as vertical space also being a factor- the soft chimes that exist are often not distinct enough for a killer to be able to quickly and efficiently be able to pinpoint exactly where they are, forcing a killer to waste precious seconds to find it. Increasing the volume, predominance, and clarity of direction, of the chimes amongst the other sounds in Dead by Daylight would give killers a subtle edge and an easier time finding boons and snuffing them out.
- Separately, this may however have to do with audio occlusion bugs & issues which DBD has historically suffered from many times in the past, and less any deliberate confusing audio shenanigans on the part of the developers themselves.
Aura reveal.
- To supplement this idea of temporary safe havens, and to more easily deal with instances of "permanent boons" (where a boon is set up in an inactive area of the map without generators that a killer could / would not go searching through without sacrificing time or pressure) there is also the idea of revealing boon totems auras. After a certain amount of time has expired (90 seconds, 120 seconds, etc.) a Boon that has been attached to a totem for that duration of time will periodically have its aura revealed to the killer. This will provide killers with pinpoint accurate visual information as to the areas survivors continue to return to throughout the match and thus erasing the killers pressure. Thus giving killers the option to move directly to the totem as quickly and efficiently as possible to snuff it out.
Distance extinguish.
- In addition to the previous idea, it may be of interest to explore the option of being able to snuff out blessed totems from a distance. This would allow killers to not waste as much time crossing great sections of the map, and stay in active zones to apply pressure while also removing a safe haven area. This would likely operate on the same duration condition as the former proposal- after a certain amount of time has expired- a killer will be able to cleanse a blessed totem from further and further ranges. After 60 seconds -16m after 80 seconds - 24m, after 110 seconds - 32m, and so on and so forth. Number values are of course subject to change.
Healing speed reduction / removal.
- This is a Circle of Healing specific idea, and it's not a novel one- the strength of providing infinite self heals is strong enough without making those heals faster. Reducing the healing speed bonus from 100% down to 75%, 50%, or perhaps even removing it entirely would go a long way in taming the strength of Circle of Healing. Only allowing survivors to heal themselves in a regular time of 16 seconds and reduce the time efficiency of healing that circle of healing so easily provides.
- Reducing the heal speed of healing others may be subject to separate balancing (IE: Remove self heal speed bonus, but keep healing others at increase of 50% or 20%).
Increased time to bless totems.
- It is what it is. Little explanation necessary here, for a change that is relatively boring- just increase the amount of time it takes to bless a totem by a few seconds. Making blessing a totem a greater commitment for each individual survivor.
- A more interesting and thoughtful way to implement this change may be to increase the amount of time it takes to bless a totem every time the action is repeated. Say when you Bless a totem you gain a token, with each token the amount of time it takes to bless another totem is increased by 2 seconds, up to a maximum of X tokens. Values subject to change.
The idea for balancing boon totems to keep them in line is not to eliminate them completely from a match, but to allow killers more frequent and easier opportunities to cleanse blessed totems such that Boons have a greater amount of counterplay available to knowledgable killers who can adapt to them.
- The most obvious and straightforward solution, a large part of the issue regarding boon totems (but specifically and especially Circle of Healing) is that their effects cover far too sizable an area of the map, especially when multiple survivors are running Boon totems you can essentially blanket nearly every active zone of the map. A capability which directly contrasts the original "small safe haven" idea that boons were originally created around. This has less to do with the issue of covering vertical space as well, which is more of a strategic quirk, and more to do with the sheer radius that Boons remain active in. Reducing their range from 24m to 16m (perhaps even 12 meters if the devs are feeling bold) and would go a long way in solving these issues.
-
@TheBigGopher said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2687772#Comment_2687772
I've played both and they tend to be used alot, and not always just because someone's being really nice. Personally I think it could help relieve a lot of the bitterness in matches, especially when someone loses when the other team comes in to say you done a good job.
Besides it wouldn't take a lot to implement, they could easily include it in an actual patch.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of things the devs could add "easily" and yet more often than not it takes an extremely long time for those changes to come to light if they make it at all. So it's better not to treat anything as easy, even simple value changes for powers or add-ons seem to take the devs a long time to change.
As far as Dead by Daylight's relationship with bitterness and toxicity- I think that problem runs far far deeper than a commendation system would have any hope of reaching. A commendation system would only scratch the surface of that can of worms. And if what you say is true about these systems not only being used for people who are being nice but for people that are "disreputable" or "dishonorable" then I would quickly point out something that could be very easily abused in Dead by Daylight. If you could "downvote" other players for being "toxic" in a match I would think such a tool would quickly grow out of hand, all survivors would label every killer toxic and all killers would label all survivors toxic. Killer used Ruin and Undying? Toxic. Think these survivors are part of a group? Toxic. Killer camping? Toxic. Survivors refusing to leave the match during endgame collapse and teabagging at exit gates? Toxic. And so on and so forth on and on and on.
And as for more egregious instances of misconduct, such as hacking or harassment, that's what the report system is already for.
"Yeah but the report system doesn't do anything" well then why would a commendation system be any different!?
-
Voice chat is entirely unnecessary, completely strips the game of its tone and atmosphere, increase the separation gap in cross-platform players specifically between PC and Console players who aren't super-likely to be playing with mics anyway, and as many others have mentioned would undoubtedly facilitate a heaping ton of toxicity in the game.
It's also something I believe the devs have made clear their staunch opposition to in the past, so regardless of community opinion I don't think it would happen anyway.
Despite this though, the gap between solo and SWF players still remains a significant one. But there are better ways to solve that issue than integrating a voice-chat mechanic. A quick chat function for example would be great, you press a button and a HUD pulls up with many different basic callout options, like "heal me!" "I'll repair this generator" "help me repair this generator!" "Save [Meg]!" "I'm being chased! Watch out!!" etc. so on and so forth.
A unique pinging system for DBD could be created by revealing auras instead of a standard First Person Shooter ping system as well. Perhaps it only highlights auras for other survivors who are in a certain proximity, and perhaps the quick chat itself (to tone it back just a little bit) also operates on a proximity system as well. Maybe killers could also see the messages being sent in proximity quick chat as well, so survivors have to be careful and wary about how and when they use it.
But even outside of these fundamental game changing additions to the core mechanics of DBD- there are other ways of bridging the gap between solo and SWF players. Making Kindred basekit for example is an idea that's kind of on the table, though it has been hotly contested (and if that were to happen, it likely wouldn't come with all the effects of Kindred the perk, it'd be more like a nerfed form of kindred that would be made basekit) but ideas of that nature are the ones that are more likely to happen. Working with existing DBD mechanics to bridge that gap rather than creating something brand new (although that doesn't necessarily make it better, it's just more realistic to envision).
-
With the recent addition of Boon Totems, and specifically Boon: Circle of Healing, maps like RPD- Especially, RPD have become 10x more insufferable. I played the remake of Resident Evil 2, I'm very familiar with the layout of the map- but finding totem spawns amidst the winding routes of the police department- and the frustration of being just above or below a totem and either having to go out of your way sacrifice time to make it all the way around to the nearest staircase and back up just to snuff it out or to leave it there and save your time but sacrifice your pressure- it's all just awful.
Arguably worse than Gideons because at least that map is relatively open and there are many spots that allow you to transition between floors, drop downs or actual staircases which are scattered both in the middle and edges of the maps. In RPD you have the center grand hall staircase, and then various staircases around the edges of the map that are all so inconveniently placed to get to.
A match I recently had where 3/4 survivors (fully decked out in the strongest of builds mind you- DS, DH, the whole kit and kaboodle) were running circle of healing, highlighted this issue for me. It was a disgustingly unbearable match, and though I put up some decent resistance- it seemed to me that Circle of Healing was the genuine win condition that cost me the match that I just couldn't compete with. It also didn't help that I was trying to get the Adept Artist achievement so I was lacking a perk in my 4th slot.
Since they probably won't change RPD because it's a licensed map, best I can hope for is some immediate changes for Circle of Healing- which I know is slightly unrelated to this thread but goddamn, it is far too strong on maps that have multiple floors.
EDIT: Since Hawkins is no longer present in the map pool, I don't see why it would be placed as an option in polls like this anymore. Especially when there's a limited number of poll options, it seems like a wasted slot (Midwich is very much a candidate for this poll being garbage in its own way for example, but it's not listed on the poll options because hawkins takes the spot??? Why???? @TheBigGopher )
-
If it is what I think it is (granted I don't play Overwatch or Paladins) then I would say no because people generally don't interact with these systems. If they do, it's really quick and off the cuff without much thought put into who they're voting for, making the results lack in sincerity.
It also doesn't really have anything to do with actually improving the experience of DBD itself, rather serving as a rating system for the experience (specifically of other players). I'd like to see a lot more being done that changes DBD to be a better game, rather than superficial systems that ultimately don't contribute or impact (as much) to that effort for improvement as much.
Perfect example: do you actively use the "Did you have fun?" rating system in post-match? Those little five dots in the top left corner above all the loadouts that were being used which you can click on and rate your match out of five? Did you even know that existed in the first place? (Not a rip on OP or anybody else, I'm just pointing out that this little feature is entirely insignificant and goes unused and unnoticed by a majority of the community).
Although maybe I'm looking at it wrong and this is more of a community engagement change, akin to the ideas of leaderboards and clans which floated around a few years ago, and perhaps alongside these changes a commendation system might make more sense.
-
@Clueless said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2631491#Comment_2631491
True, they'd never add something that muddles their brand as a horror game.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/VEUKFKEGRCE1/trickster.gif
lmao I get what you are saying though, posting trickster is just cheating.
I never understand why people cite trickster as a compelling reason DBD is neglecting its horror thematic, thematically speaking, trickster is just as interesting (and just as much horror) as any other character on the roster. The whole idea is basically a cautionary tale about our own celebrities, the people we glorify, adore, and put on a pedestal, and how that misplaced trust by a wide audience can easily be abused or taken advantage of. The dangers of idolizing people with fame that can result in turning a blind eye to all the warning signs of reckless, malicious, or even violent behavior, just because they're lionized by wide circles. (Think of how horrified and disgusted people were by the news that came out about Jeffrey Epstein, Harvey Weinstein, and any number of other famed figures of focus in the media. For all their loathsome activities, imagine if they were unhinged killers instead.)
Trickster's lore and character design all circle around this idea- he's essentially a peacock that lures you in with flashy tricks, bright colors, a presumably beautiful singing voice, and performative theater, combined with a charismatic and energetic (but ultimately artificial) personality, who "thrived under the attention of others" to an obsessive degree. The Trickster is a classic psychopath who manipulates those around him, and uniquely disguises his murderous activities under the guise of a vigorous and lavish lifestyle.
And to that end it also puts the point home that not all "evil" (for lack of a better word) is necessarily grotesque, twisted, mutilated, or monstrous. It can also manifest itself in forms that are attractive, glamorous, and otherwise desirable, and that is the whole point of trickster and nearly every cosmetic he has fulfills that exact purpose, including the Fire Moon Performer outfit you used for an example. Trickster exists on the killer roster to move in essentially the exact opposite direction of the rest of the cast, and thereby also diversifying said cast and the types of stories that we get to hear and talk about- as far as the character goes (removed from any questions or debate about gameplay) he is a welcome addition to (the universe of) Dead by Daylight.
@TheBigGopher said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2631491#Comment_2631491
You say all of that but then Feng Ming gets another set of pjs. The game barely takes itself seriously anymore, why not.
Just as well, I really don't think this detracts from DBD's core horror elements either. People wear pajamas in the evening / when they are about to go to sleep- or in other words, at a time of day when they feel comfortable and safe in their own homes in their own beds. By dressing survivors in their own pajamas and placing them in circumstances like DBD does, you corrupt and violate those pleasant ideas of a restful sleep in the security of your own home. It's also not very far removed from the setups of many scenes across slasher films in general- home invasion is a frightening thing and it's featured in much of horror where a character is caught off guard because of those previously established concepts of relaxing and being at ease in your house and especially at night.
I could very easily visualize a scene in movies like Halloween or Scream where X side character wakes up after hearing a bump in the night, and in traditional slasher fashion goes to investigate the strange noise- getting up from bed in their pajamas and wandering unsuspectingly through the dark, only to find themselves suddenly screaming when the blade slips between their ribs.
I mean this is classic slasher stuff- where is the conflict or contrast with the horror in Dead by Daylight? There is no difference between the aforementioned hypothetical scene, and getting robbed away from your own home in the dead of night- to be plucked from your own time and place in the universe, and placed in an unfamiliar environment where killers of all kinds hunt you down.
EDIT: And as far as both of these ideas go, I think there's a very distinct difference between killers and survivors wearing what might be considered (but isn't really) unorthodox clothes- and survivors / killers doing the Carlton behind the safety of a pallet or camping in front of a hook. There are a few leaps in degree to get from one to the other, the latter being very much an extreme.
Although most people on this particular thread clarified that those aren't the kinds of emotes they were looking for anyway so it is what it is.
-
I really think that the impermanence of Boon Totems should be much more developed than it is. Although I don't think they should be able to be broken (face it: Boon: Totems just aren't balanced the same way Hex: Totems are, and if they were I would expect MANY more changes to come to them than just being able to be broken. I'm talking map-wide effects. If you think Boons should be treated like hex's than you think they should be treated like Hex's. Really let that sink in on what that means.)
Boons should be much, MUCH easier for killers to find than they are. I think the audio cue needs to be raised up in volume to be more prominently heard so that it's clearly obvious where it is. Unlike Hex totems Boons aren't meant to be this big secret presence on the map, Survivors know where they are and equally Killers should be given some fairly blatant clues and hints to where they are, not soft chimes, I'm talking regular sounding chimes, like Johnny Windchimes.
This way Boon Totems require much more dedicated attention to them. Ideally you'd get maybe 2 maybe 3 uses out of a Boon before the killer finds it and snuffs it out, and then starts this game of cat and mouse where the survivor needs to take time and bounce around trying to find a new place to put it and the killer always finding it within a reasonable amount of time and snuffing it out again.
The permanent Boon totem in a corner of the map I feel is more problematic. I get that it takes time for survivors to get to that part of the map, receive their buff, get back to the parts of the map that matter, but the sheer consistent sustain you get from this I think is well worth the time in most situations.That's where Boons become a greater issue to deal with because it kind of stonewalls and hopes a killer has of snowballing pressure.
For those situations maybe the Boons aura is highlighted to the killer for a brief time (say 5 seconds) after a certain length of time has passed and a Boon has been attached to a specific totem for some time. After that the highlight will routinely appear at fixed intervals, say every 30 seconds or so. This gives the killer information they need about where it is Survivors have been going, and provides them a clear option to go there and snuff it out really quickly if they have the time.
Perhaps even better, after a Boon totem has been highlighted one time, any time a Boon is highlighted again the killer will be given the ability to snuff the boon out from a distance at increased ranges for every fixed interval that passes but only when it is highlighted. So the first time it's highlighted you're only seeing the aura, the 2nd time the highlighted boon appears killers can snuff it out at a distance of 16m, then 24m, 36m, 48, 56, 64, etc. so on and so forth. Again, this option is only given for that small window of time that a Boon's aura is highlighted to the killer (2 - 5 seconds, doesn't really matter just can't be too long, and of course can't be too short, must be realistically noticeable).
-
@Brokenbones said:
As long as the Doll is apart of it in some capacity then I'd still be invested
Think of Twins, Victor is identical to Chucky in a few ways which is weird to think of but Twins is a concept for how a Child's Play killer COULD work.
This ^
When the twins came out everybody was talking about the new killer and what a unique concept it was and all that, but one of my first thoughts was "Oh My God they're testing out how Chucky could work"
I got so excited when I realized this, Victor is literally the precursor for Chucky mechanics. The only real issue is figuring out Chucky's animations, but the conclusion I came to there was he would probably do a dark chant and summon the entity's claws to raise the survivors up for him to hook them.
I guess you could also talk about making Flashlight saves, but you could also chalk that up to "his height is part of Chucky's power, it has pros and cons, and one of the benefits is you can't really flashlight save without some difficulty" and that would be that.
Long story short, (pun?) I firmly believe there's a way to make Chucky work. If they have to make an entire new height class just to introduce chucky then why not? By all means that would introduce some fresh variability in the killer roster to have killers classified as "short" and that opens up a whole new wealth of possibilities.
-
5 minute matches definitely sounds too short, and that sounds like a match where either the Survivors gen rushed the hell out of the killer with very little opportunity for the killer to snowball pressure / momentum, or a match with a godly spirit / nurse or a killer with instantdown momentum pressure like Oni / Myers / Leatherface / Hillbilly that basically took the survivors completely by surprise and couldn't react quickly enough to what was going on.
Neither of those matches are fun for the side that's losing, and arguably it isn't all that fun for the side winning either because they overwhelm their opponent(s) far too quickly.
I'm not going to say that I've ever done the research where I've timed my own matches, but I will say most discussions I've been a part of regarding the length of an individual match usually say that on average matches last from 10-15 minutes. So I was surprised to see intervals lower than that as the listed poll options (is anybody really going to vote under 3 minutes? Why is that there??)
And in the grand scheme of multiplayer gaming, 10 minute matches is really on the shorter end of match length / duration. When many games can easily go for 20, 30, or 40 minutes for a single match. But again, I'm not being scientific about this, I'm just kind of guesstimating off games I've played recently like Hunt: Showdown, Deep Rock Galactic, League, etc. 8 minutes is like the tournament timer for Smash Ultimate isn't it? In 1 v 1s you're probably talking about 5 minutes give or take for two players to go against each other with 3 stocks each, but of course that's shorter because it's literally only 2 people dueling it out.
I would say once you get into the 5 minute range of matches you're talking about some truly faster paced gameplay and I just don't think that generally represents most of DBD (unless you're always going 100% hardcore sweaty- which I personally don't find fun but to each their own). You've got perks like Corrupt Intervention which last 2 minutes, or Deadlock which blocks the generator with the most progress for 30 seconds (activating 4 times that's another 2 minutes), and then aside from other slowdowns you've got the EGC- and if you got stomped survivors routinely feel compelled to gloat at the exit gate for the entire 3 minute EGC timer and hold killer hostage until they finally get their time in the sun or the timer runs out (not a rare occurrence).
So I'm just thinking about all these different things in DBD that aren't uncommon which put game length into perspective, and I definitely don't think it's adding up to 5-6 minute matches, and barely the 7-8 option. The way I see it 10 minutes is really the time it takes for all the different DBD shenanigans to happen and I think that's fine.
Things only really get frustrating when the match is prolonged without a hope of victory from the other side. IE 2 survivors crouching around for 5 entire minutes just on their own hiding around the map, or a killer who just pushes people off the final generators but can never commit to a chase to create pressure. (Obviously there's not much else they can do besides flat out give up and stand still, but that doesn't change the fact these situations aren't fun and only prolong the inevitable).
-
@TapeKnot said:
Her design just looks kind of ugly and generic to me. She looks more like an amalgamation of existing killers rather than something entirely new. Her general look and weapon is very similar to The Spirit's, and her body proportions resembles The Demogorgon's. I also just don't get her power's visual design. Her appearance has a lot of ink, with the only connection to crows being the long neck and her behavior. So why does her power not involve ink, or art in general? I get that crows play a large part in her lore, but why would you name a killer "The Artist" if her power has nothing to do with art? Overall, I feel like was not the way to go with an "artist" killer, and it feels like the crow themes in her lore and power only exist because the devs couldn't find out how to make an art-related power.
I think the connection to art is supposed to come across in the ink itself. Which is represented decently enough in her character design I feel, her limbs got cut off and her "art" is what took its place. Also, aren't the crows themselves made from ink? It's literally a manifestation of her art brought into a cruel reality, an artist's innocent drawings coming to life in a very demonic way.
And the connection to crows not only comes across in her proportions and her birdlike animations, but also visually represented in that black metal feathery ornaments she wears around her collar and waist as well. Her long hair and red dress she wears by default is very loose and floaty as well, which makes a bit more sense in the context of birds that fly.
But I agree with you that it's not the best design in the world, and the cool things about her feel a bit more nuanced and are not featured perhaps as prominently as they could be- and in that sense yeah she can come across as a bit bland almost. Although I'm sure somebody out there will just retort "it's not bland, it's simplistic and simplicity isn't necessarily a bad thing" so there's that as well.
-
Devs said they would never put "Fortnite esque dance emotes" in Dead by Daylight.
Probably for the best. That sounds wildly out of character for Dead by Daylight, and as much as people on the forums love to joke about that stuff (IE Shirtless Myers) that would probably never fly due to the license holders.
I mean- in order to do something like that, I'd assume you'd have to get every single license holder to agree to that? Since it would be a killer wide input that affects all killers that they would all be able to do. I don't see that happening anytime soon, or really anytime at all.
You also have to think about what that means for Dead By Daylight's brand and image, regardless of what the community thinks, the Dead By Daylight Brand takes it's horror aesthetic very seriously (proof of this can be found in nearly every single trailer or DBD production for commercial / advertised use on Youtube and other media platforms), and that's appealing for new players looking for a horror-themed game / horror-themed party game. It's also appealing to potential future partners with Dead by Daylight, who see a horror game filled to the brim with recognizable slashing icons who have been faithfully recreated alongside a multitude of well written, interesting, and unique original characters. I can scarcely imagine what the license holders for The Xenomorph, Candyman, Pennywise, The Predator, The Thing, etc. would think if they saw killers could "victory dance" on top of a corpse that they just murdered via memento mori. I hardly imagine the license holders for Myers, Freddy, Pinhead, Leatherface, etc. would have appreciated that either.
(Although yes, I acknowledge that Resident Evil & Stranger Things happen to be in Fortnite which is emote city x10, but I wouldn't go so far as to say they represent the interests of every license holder that has made partnerships with DBD and I think that's a reasonable inference to make.)
Hilarious for the internet, great for memes if people want to make their own SFM or that kind of thing, probably not good for the game's public image.
Plus, I think the limited amount of expression killers have access to is funny in its own right. Simple things like the slow turn around or a head nod wouldn't be nearly as funny in the past if we already had super elaborate emotes from the very beginning. Killers have made the best with what they've got and I think that's fine.
-
@angematias said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2627793#Comment_2627793
The problem is that there's been cases of killers with a grudge towards someone with a profile name BMing them in game. Outside of game a private profile will do, in game it gets absurd
Hence why I said this can be an option players could choose to turn on and off. This can easily apply to both steam profile and display name in-game.
-
@zedalert said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2627793#Comment_2627793
Maybe the toggle option would be the best solution, like we have toggle option for cross-play and friend requests.
The same forced change was made a long time ago to survivors, today they can't see the killers' profile in the lobby. But the killer also had the option to hide his profile and whatever you offered, but that's not helping for both killer and survivors. And I totally don't understand why I should change my Steam profile and it's settings only to play one game.
I get that, that's why I said it should be something in Dead by Daylight's settings that you can choose to change- since for some people DBD is the only thing that might be causing them issues in this respect, and everything else in their library might be completely fine.
But I am saying that if anyone is frequently harassed, I want them to know that that option is available to them should they really need it. That's why I mentioned it in the first place.
EDIT:
The reason why I think having names be present is because there is still value in seeing them. Killers get their own share of grief too, and for example maybe you just had a horrible game against a toxic 4 man SWF, and the next two games in a row you go against that exact same group (I've actually been in this situation before- although I stayed for all three games). Without being able to see the names, you wouldn't be able to tell if you're going against the same players or not.
-
You can already set your steam profile to private so that people don't bother you if you're in the unfortunate position where you've been frequently harassed by other players in the community. It's never happened to me before personally, but I've heard some horror stories of some really malicious individuals that exist that take things a step too far. So if you're looking for immediate changes that is always an option.
In the same way, I wonder if maybe it might be a good idea to make it a toggle option in Dead by Daylight itself, as an option to hide your profile or not. Survivors / Killers can decide if they want the link to their steam profile to be visible, and if they choose to they can hide it from other players if they feel it's necessary, or if that's just something they want to do.
Not one of the poll options but felt it should be suggested anyway ^
I'm not too sure I like the idea of making it a forced change that needs to apply to everyone is all.
-
The neck really throws me off- it looks a bit out of proportion and seems way longer than it should be- her limbs seem kind of stretched too, although I know that's in part due to the unnatural inky appendages she's got going on.
I was wondering if there was something in her lore about her head being chopped off- and it's attached to her body in the realm of the entity because of the ink- and she purposefully stretches the ink between her neck and head to make her head stand taller so that she can see from a higher point of view? And that's why she has such a high collar, because the clothing covers the hideous wound that separated her head from her body, and as a bonus- makes her seem more birdlike in a way, akin to the crows she has such an affinity for.
But that's just me speculating, I haven't read the lore yet so I have no idea.
Aside from some weirdness about her proportions, I think she's got a really cool design. I like that you can see the ink flowing through her veins in her face, her eyes are an inky pitch black, and I love the idea of an Artist who had her arms cut off which is horrifically tragic, so in response she gets new limbs made from her art. (Again, haven't read the lore yet which will fill in the context, but I can already see the idea based on her visual design and it's really cool nonetheless).
-
@Tr1nity said:
"And as far as majority goes let me remind that it was the majority of the playerbase at the time that pushed long and hard for two full years for Freddy's extensive rework. If the devs didn't see a monumental community effort to revamp his entire power they wouldn't have raised a finger to change him, because the chapter had already been out for two whole years by the time his rework came in Patch 3.1.0 and they had already made money off the sales for the chapter. But they saw the sheer amount of people who were making all the right points with all the evidence to back up their claims and it actually happened."
"These are perfect examples to say that even if you had a majority, that wouldn't necessarily make you right. I believe in philosophy they call this "Argumentum ad populum" or the Appeal to Popularity / Appeal to Numbers fallacy. So you can throw as many polls my way as you want, it all falls under the same pretense- it doesn't somehow immediately make the return of old Freddy a good thing."
I see a contradiction, though
It's actually not a full inconsistency / contradiction because you'll notice in that first quote I never claimed that this was the correct thing to do. More accurately: I never said that because the majority at the time wanted those changes, that automatically made those changes the right thing to do.
In fact you'll see at the bottom there I addressed that population was "making all the right points with all the [right] evidence to back up their claims" so my justification immediately leans toward the rhetoric that was being used rather than simply the sheer numbers, a mistake @GeneralV fell into. To supplement this, I'd say I've never seen arguments against modern Freddy that are as justifiable as the arguments against old Freddy 2-3 years ago.
Although yes, I can see how you might read it as implied, given my stance. Although I can assure that is a misrepresentation of what I meant, aside from the previous point- it's also important to remember I was using "Majority" in a different context that was less argumentative, and more factual. It is a point of historic fact not up for debate or contention because this actually happened, the changes went through, and if they hadn't we wouldn't be talking about it. It is a factual statement that a majority of the community led the charge to incite changes to Freddy's base kit which compelled to developers to respond- and looking not only at the fact that they decided to respond at all but to the degree that they responded is very telling on the quality of those community requests at the time. People had Freddy figured out, it was common knowledge what he lacked, what his weaknesses were, what made people frustrated, and the developers responded in kind.
The same way, for example, people had DS figured out. We knew exactly what the problems with DS were, what insane advantages the perk provided which facilitated a much more aggressive playstyle killers couldn't do anything about, what made people frustrated, and the developers responded in kind. It took a lot of proper feedback and thorough investigation on the part of the community to make those changes a reality, but they happened precisely because of that thorough feedback and proper investigation. Something that I see lacking in this loud chunk of the playerbase that really talk more through nostalgia and less because of pressing issues regarding Freddy today.
@Nathan13 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2627488#Comment_2627488
Lol lot of effort put into that!
It was a nice little distraction. 🙂
Although thank you for recognizing it takes more thought and energy to put that post together than what some others have been posting on this thread! Always appreciate the praise and acclamation 😁
-
@GeneralV said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2626044#Comment_2626044
You do have every right to voice your opinion, but never to insult someone else's. Calling a different opinion "foolish" merely because it doesn't align with your own is not only disrespectful, but also childish. And when it comes to basic respect, your alleged longevity in DBD doesn't matter in the slightest.
So I ask you again: who do you think you are to call our pleas "foolish"?
Now, I don't understand how a supposedly veteran player did not see strength that was right before him. Old Freddy excelled in control, not simply slowdown. Yes, this particular effect was strong, but it never gave you free victories, nor was it his only advantage. Your comment about his uniqueness is just plain wrong and unrealistic: even people who, somehow, enjoy his current power admit that his old self was the most unique character DBD has ever released. Heck, if you want a popular example there is Otzdarva, who said it himself. Now, the idea with Freddy was to play him in a less aggressive manner, knowing when to chase and drop chases, making use of his aura reading and Dream Transition mindgames to take advantage of survivor's mistakes and controlling the game in general. If your only focus was the supposed "stalemate", then it is obvious that you would see him as a weaker killer, where in reality he was not.
And, now we get to this "majority" that you speak of. I don't doubt for one second that you saw a few players wrongly ask for a full rework. I saw it too...once. One player in a god forsaken Discord server that had less than 10 hours of gameplay...Still, most reasonable people that did complain about Freddy asked for buffs and QoL improvements, never a full rework. And it is safe to say that people who, for some reason, asked for a full rework regretted their decision. The absolute majority of the community prefers Old Freddy over...whatever the hell current Freddy is. This poll is not enough for you?
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/242751/give-us-back-old-freddy
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/255159/do-you-want-old-freddy-back
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/281207/freddy-just-feels-bad-to-play-right-now
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2337015#Comment_2337015
Then see it for yourself. Check the comments, support, upvotes...judge by any metric. People do want him back.
Now, do you know why the devs reworked him? No you don't. Just like you don't know why did they nerf Billy, why did they implement Patch 1.9.2 in the past, why did they decide against reverting the UI Change, why did they tried to nerf Rat Liver, why did they nerfed the Twins, why did they nerf Deathslinger...and this dumb list goes on. No one knows why did BHVR made bad decisions, and his rework is one of them.
Do you know what I see?
I see the majority of the community united for a righteous cause, demanding the devs to return what was once taken. To revert a bad change that never took Old Freddy mains, such as myself, into consideration. I see people sharing memories of an exciting past, and hopes for the future of this killer.
Perhaps this topic is dead for you. But then again, I already the know the nature of your comments and what you do. Discussing this is, more likely than not, pointless. I will, however, leave a final message that I will never stop. I will mention him at every opportunity, call for his return whenever I can.
And I will have my killer back.
Now, farewell.
Truth
It's true, experience doesn't specifically denote whether you're right about something. Although it probably does give you an edge in terms of foundational knowledge in most cases- for example I believe it's ridiculous for people that have never actually experienced old Freddy for some reason are among the number of forum users voting to have that version of him back. That support doesn't seem dubious or misplaced to you in the slightest?
Equally though, if we're going to talk about actual evidence in regards to truth- I would point out that numbers (majority / minority) don't make something true either. You can cite any number of people in any number of circumstances to find that little piece of wisdom is also true, a basic examples: a majority of people throughout the first half of the 20th century didn't believe smoking / nicotine was related to lung cancer (or any negative ailments) until medical studies throughout the 50's and 60's came out. Or perhaps even more simple: a majority of children believe in Santa Claus.
These are perfect examples to say that even if you had a majority, that wouldn't necessarily make you right. I believe in philosophy they call this "Argumentum ad populum" or the Appeal to Popularity / Appeal to Numbers fallacy. So you can throw as many polls my way as you want, it all falls under the same pretense- it doesn't somehow immediately make the return of old Freddy a good thing.
"Foolish"
As for this whole fixation on my use of the word "foolish" I think you're taking it far too seriously. Whenever I'm on the forums I make it a point to criticize ideas, not people, I frankly don't know anyone here personally and equally nobody here knows me personally. I have no right to make any personal judgements nor does anyone else, unlike @SOMENINJANAME for example, who felt personally obligated to throw some libel my way, not that it had any particular relevance to the thread.
So when I say foolish, foolhardy, stupid, or any number of adjectives to that effect- they are purely in regards to an idea, notion, or suggestion. This idea that you can't call somebody out on a dumb idea because that's "not nice" or "there are no dumb ideas" is ludicrous. If I said right now that survivors should run at a base speed of 120% and have 3 health states instead of two, I would hope that you would call me out and say that's absolutely ######### absurd- and rightfully so!
"Now do you know why the devs reworked him?"
I feel like this is a very weird misdirect. I think you know exactly why the devs reworked him, I think you know that I know, we all for the most part know exactly why, and restating so almost feels redundant. To claim that it was some bold, out of the blue change that came out of nowhere that nobody wanted except some obscure guy with less than 10 hours, is well.. bold to say the least.
But I wanted to indulge you in that answer and before I go any further I want you to please appreciate just how long it took me to find this. You'd think it'd be easy, but apparently all of Dead by Daylight's dev / community updates are just wiped from existence, and their official Youtube Channel was extremely difficult to navigate since apparently you can't scroll down to anything posted more than 5 months ago. Took me upwards of 30 minutes of diving around the forums, google, twitch, and youtube, but I finally found something that finally satisfies me so I hope it satisfies you as well. Here is your answer:
https://youtu.be/_ypdDN388Xg?t=856 https://youtu.be/JyWcUp8RcSE?t=4382The Official Dead by Daylight Freddy Rework Livestream. Posted on Jul. 4, 2019, either the same day or just before the PTB came out for people to test the rework changes. Before this, in the 2nd video, The rework itself was actually introduced in the 3rd year anniversary livestream which saw the announcement Chapter XII: Ghostface, and this was posted on May 31st of 2019. In both videos, Stefan Horvath (Game Designer) lays it out in plain terms exactly why they were making these changes.
The response is consistent across both videos (and in both I have the URL linked to the specific time that this question of why was addressed) although he goes slightly more in depth in the follow up video (the first link). He cites "frustrations" amongst the playerbase specifically in regards to Freddy. This is what he says exactly:
"Ultimately, there was some frustrations playing as and against the nightmare, which Thierry and I, as well as other members of the team have tried to work towards alleviating- by addressing the power and changing things that were not as fun." -Stefan Horvath
You cannot get any more explicit than this @GeneralV there is no beating around the bush here whatsoever. You can't equate the Freddy rework to the mysterious on the fly changes that DBD makes out of the blue, to something that required as detailed and as comprehensive an effort as the Freddy rework. Great changes require great inciting incidents and there is simply no way you can say that the devs went out of their way, to spend time and money, creating a brand new fundamentally different power, which essentially restructured the killer from the ground up and really only retained one aspect from the original killer.
I mean seriously, your analogy is that creating a brand new killer, for no extra money whatsoever because the chapter had already been released, is somehow the same as when they decided to change Rat Liver. An Add-on. Or why they nerfed twins / deathslinger. Please tell me how these things are equatable, I desperately want to know. I'm not being sarcastic here, I genuinely want to know your thought process, and the line of logic that takes you from Rat Liver -> to full blown Killer release for no extra money. Because that is what happened to Freddy, he became a brand new killer, and nothing like this has ever happened in the history of the game before then, or since.
Actual arguments that relate to freddy
Finally I left the most quality part of your post for last. The actual argument / substance which I can address, starting with "Old Freddy excelled in control" this was the only bit of your post that I found had substance, although it was interspersed with statements like "just plain wrong" which isn't an argument. (Again, not a knock on you- but on the arguments you presented, let's stay focused here).
Yes. Freddy excelled in control, but this was really it. Again, he sacrificed everything for that control, map mobility, chase potential, he was made even weaker than most killers because he famously couldn't attack survivors for seven seconds.
Now you point out that all this required on the part of the player was to play Freddy in different ways, much like how you wouldn't play Nurse in the same way you play any other killer. However, I rebuttle by saying that even against a Freddy playing in the way that Freddy "was supposed to be played" was uninspired, and could easily be dealt with. Primarily this basically involved Freddy bouncing around between targets, pulling one person into the dream world and then going to another generator, pulling another in, and then returning to the first person who is caught off guard pressuring them rinse and repeat....
I say this isn't unique because it's not like the whole Guerrilla warfare technique isn't something killers do already. In fact this is the strategy most Stealth killers use nowadays and how you'll find most Wraith players at the high level will play. A Wraith will catch someone off guard, hit them, cloak, run off and hit somebody else, cloak again and return to the first guy and swoop in for the down. Old Freddy might have been the predecessor for this strategy, but it's no hidden secret amongst the playerbase now, and again- you'll find most Wraith's, Ghostface's, as well as just killers in general hitting somebody and then leaving them to apply pressure on another segment of the map.
And for Freddy, this strategy wasn't always a working one, because if you left somebody alone on a generator and went off to pressure somebody else, they had 7 entire seconds and then some to have RNG throw them a random skillcheck which they could easily fail, and force Freddy to redo the cycle all over again. This was something you could not do anything to change, and I would think that a proposed Freddy main would remember that.
Freddy wasn't unique, and I maintain that opinion. He was an M1 killer without a single chase tool, and had a permanent passive slowdown and aura reading on all survivors affected by his power. But the one thing that WAS unique about Freddy, was the dream world- and notice that they KEPT that mechanic when they reworked Freddy! In fact, it was the ONE thing they kept from his old base kit, the invisibility and intermittent visibility is still present in his kit today.
Crusaders
All this talk about "a righteous cause" and "demanding to return what was stolen" really only further cements my perspective that you're romanticizing this whole affair about Freddy, and looking at this topic through biased, rose tinted glasses. I have no doubt that to your "majority" these powerful and rousing words of inspiration are quite the call they can rally around!
But they do nothing for your argument. Certainly they do nothing to convince me that your opinion is anything other than "foolish" in this matter- and again to say for a third time, I do this to criticize constructively, not out of malice. Unlike some people in this thread, who seek to vilify those with opinions that differ from theirs, the barbarians.
So! I will meet your challenge, because I am equally firm in my own belief that this is an absolutely atrocious idea. I will myself, leave a final message that I will never stop. I will continue to criticize this wild and unfounded notion at every opportunity, and call the of old Freddy a blasphemous notion that stands against progress, for it is time to look to the future- to better and brighter ideas that aren't blinded by nostalgia or steeped in controversy.
And I will make sure, that for the sake of my fellow players whether they know better or not, Old Freddy Stays dead.
Even if that makes me a villain to some.
https://youtu.be/YICrS1DiaeQ?t=2Now, farewell.
TL;DR
- Agrumentum ad Populum - Appeal to Popularity / Appeal to Numbers is a fallacy. Even if you had a majority (which I argue against) it does not mean you are correct- in this case, it does not mean that bringing old Freddy back is a right decision or a good thing.
- I call ideas foolish because they are. I seek to criticize ideas, not people, and ideas that are deserving of criticism should be met with it, even if people don't like hearing it.
- We know exactly why the devs reworked him, and this isn't a secret. You're basically asking me to restate something I've already said, but I took a painstaking amount of time to find official statements from the dev team answering your question. Citing community "frustrations" with Freddy's old power that made him unfun to both play as, and against.
- Freddy was a weak killer who's margin for improvement had very little to do with how capable a Freddy you were, and more to do with how poorly prepared a survivor team was against a Freddy. Freddy's only benefit was his control and his slowdown, but lacked so severly in every other category that any other killer on the roster was a better pick than him at the time. There was little reason to pick him over any other killer in the roster.
- Freddy wasn't a unique killer. He was an M1 killer with a slowdown power and that is all- it probably took more thought and creativity to create the Twins than it did to make 2018 Freddy. His one redeeming quality was the interesting "dream world" addition which resulted in a visual mechanic where he was either invisible or could be intermittently seen before coming into full view. You'll notice that the one redeeming quality- was KEPT in the new modern version of Freddy.
- Romanticizing your argument and recommitting to it without actually having contributed much any substance is not good for any argument. Reaffirming your claim is not an argument, and it shows more of how lacking you are in terms of substantive points to debate with, rather than bolstering the strength of your rhetoric.
- Bonus point: There is more that I could have talked about! However you said this would be your last post, so I have decided not to expend the effort on discussing how an old Freddy would absolutely not survive in today's modern meta of Dead by Daylight, or how new Freddy actually does a better job of representing the unique aspects of Freddy from the films than old Freddy does- points that lacked context in this discussion.
- Bonus bonus point: I FOUND the video where the devs said they wouldn't keep both old freddy and new freddy / have old freddy make a return! Here it is, albeit it's slightly more open ended than I gave it credit for, but given they almost always say "never say never" to some degree- the point still stands that this is a deconfirm and would never happen in all but the unlikeliest of scenarios.
NOTE:
If anybody responds to this post with something that I have already addressed because they decided to only read the TL;DR, I am only going to refer to them back to this main post.
EDIT:
@glitchboi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2626224#Comment_2626224
I love how you actually added evidence to your comment to support your claim. I knew my poll would come in clutch someday! You dropped this btw 👑
It's like you guys think I'm not going to respond or something 😂 😈
-
@Seiko300 said:
I like Bendy and the Ink Machine. I think it's got a really cool visual style, and thematic premise- this idea of an artist's innocent (more or less) drawings coming to life in a very demonic way.
However, the art style is so strikingly different, I think they'd have a very difficult time translating it into DBD. Having a map in Sepia Tones and a black and white killer to match against survivors running around in full color, doesn't meld very well and the contrast I think is too much for DBD.
I think a paragraph featuring just the inky form of Bendy might be more possible, but there are still a lot of hurdles to overcome. As far as I remember there wasn't really any true violence in that game, it was more implied violence / cartoon violence, where you can tear a head off someone's shoulders off screen (like how the Projectionist dies) and it won't matter because Ink spurts out instead of blood. Not that DBD is the most graphic game in the world, but there are graphic elements to it- slashing at a survivor spews blood all over the killer's screen, survivors leak blood as they try to escape, and of course the Moris are actually pretty graphic and more in line with your standard gruesome horror deaths. Just as a few examples. Bendy and the Ink Machine doesn't really work with this either.
"Maybe" sounds a bit too hopeful, I'd probably be teetering somewhere between "Maybe" and "No" I won't say it's truly impossible but damn near pretty difficult I'd bet.
Apologies for the necro I suppose, but I was thinking about this thread when PTB released today.
Unfortunately I think Bendy's chances just decreased considering this new chapter. New killer seems to have taken her place in the roster as our resident "Artist" killer with the same or at least pretty close Ink concept to boot as well.
Which isn't to say that killers who are similar in concept or visual style can't coexist, so as I said before still not impossible per say. Hillbilly / Leatherface, Legion / Ghostface, etc. But since Bendy was probably lower in demand to begin with, and this original killer sort of acts as a surrogate in his place, things are looking even less likely is all I'm saying
-
@GeneralV said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2623067#Comment_2623067
Foolish cries, huh?
And who do you think you are to call our pleas "foolish"?
First of all, the Old Freddy you are thinking about isn't even "V1.0". That would be his on-release version, who was actually the fourth strongest killer in the game at the time.
Additionally, your comment is just plain wrong. There were several, and I mean several, threads proving that most people definitely want him back. The absolute majority of the community, I might add. Heck, look at the very poll you are commenting on.
I was here for the Old Freddy (or Freddy "V2.0", as you would call it), mained for him for months on end until his rework dropped, knew his strengths and weaknesses inside out. All of that lost because of the terrible decision to completely change him, without ever taking his players into consideration.
We want our killer back, and there is nothing foolish about that.
A guy that's been playing the game for 5 years since 2016 that's who I think I am. I have every right of experience to voice my opinion and call out others for what I think is a foolish one.
Old Freddy excelled at absolutely nothing except slowdown, by all standards his power wasn't all that incredibly unique to begin with, and the playstyle that he encouraged wasn't fun to play as a killer and it especially wasn't fun to play against as survivors. Essentially slowing down the progress of generators to the point of creating a near stalemate but without actually gaining any ground or applying any significant pressure that would get the killer any closer to his goals of 12 hooking or 4 kills. Old Freddy was anything but fun, he was obnoxious, and the very definition of a passive killer whose entire kit operated passively. The extremely narrow amount of wiggle room where a Freddy main could hone their skills to be better through little tricks like mindgaming your intermittent view was so incredibly niche, it's beyond me that these small things somehow convinced people Freddy was anywhere close to even a mediocre killer.
And as far as majority goes let me remind that it was the majority of the playerbase at the time that pushed long and hard for two full years for Freddy's extensive rework. If the devs didn't see a monumental community effort to revamp his entire power they wouldn't have raised a finger to change him, because the chapter had already been out for two whole years by the time his rework came in Patch 3.1.0 and they had already made money off the sales for the chapter. But they saw the sheer amount of people who were making all the right points with all the evidence to back up their claims and it actually happened.
You want to talk about a majority that could push to create change? That was a majority which created change. Not this piddly 48% - 40% between Yes / Probably and No / Probably not. (As of writing).
"We want our killer back" Bah.
All I see is a loud minority equipped with their rose tinted glasses and whispering sweet nothings about a past that never even existed.
Again- that coffin was SEALED away, nailed shut, and buried 60 feet under ground in solid concrete. Even if you could argue that it was worth the time to reverse the change, it wouldn't matter. It Is. Never. Going. To. Happen. Ever.
And again, I'm glad for it.
@SOMENINJANAME said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2623321#Comment_2623321
Good on you man. That guy rights articles to every poll always throwing in some offensive negativity while trying to seem briliant. Me and my mates are always laughing when we make a poll and he writes some long, negative, and overthought response. I love old Freddy, and if there are people that enjoyed his old self, that is OK.
That's not true!
I also write long and overthought responses in the lore section. Sometimes, not as frequent though, lore doesn't get as much interesting activity going on community wise.
That aside, I'm glad you've been reading my responses at least 😁
Also, I find it incredibly ironic you're introducing him to "the guy that's always on the forums and is always negative" when you're talking to a guy who has literally thousands more posts on the forums than I do. I checked- I've almost got a third of his total so far.
-
Exactly. I rest my case.
-
@Tr1nity said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2623067#Comment_2623067
"And the tears of the nonbelieving infidels, crying at the feet of the nightmare, shall only fall upon hostile ears"
Renjiro Doctrine 13:1
"Why are there no knock knock jokes in America?
Because Freedom Rings"
The Many Compositions of Martin Luther King, Jr. by Calyborne Carter, Ralph A. Larson, Penny E. Richardson, & Louis T. Harrison, eds. 1979
-
Devs said definitively this would never happen and for good reason.
Good riddance. I (and I think most people that were present for Freddy V1.0) am glad such foolish cries will only ever fall on deaf ears.
-
I have re-broken the tie.
I was really torn on this decision though- favorite color is blue, but I'm much more familiar with and enjoy those ribbons (even if they're premade and just stapled on) on the red than the bow on the blue. Also I guess I associate xmas with Red more than Blue, but I think that's mostly everybody anyway.
-
@dugman said:
I don't have a problem off hand with removing the caps, but I said Maybe because that sounds like a change that might have unintended consequences.
"Unintended consequences"
"Oh no- we made everyone TOO happy and satisfied with Dead by Daylight- we need to increase the grind again to compensate!! Quick- add an additional two more perk tiers for a total of 5 levels, and the first two will be worse versions of the perk as it exists now. Raise the BP costs for all perks and rarities, and decrease the spawn chances for any and all BP Bonus Offerings especially Escape Cakes / Survivor Puddings / Party Streamers, we want to see as few of those used in daily matches as possible! While we're at it, remove the BP rewards for the archives and reduce the amount of BP you get from finishing daily challenges!! That'll really show them we mean BUSINESS!!!
...And while we're at it, let's nerf Pig for equal measure just to be safe. Can't have this community get too comfortable now, always gotta keep the grind at maximum so even veterans with thousands of hours won't have a hope of getting everything. Yup. Alls well ends well.
Y'know what guys, I think we did a pretty good job so far." -BHVR, on the topic of avoiding "unintended consequences" when addressing the grind in Dead by Daylight, probably
-
There needs to be more Sci Fi Horror represented in this game- it's a true staple of the horror genre with origins that stretch extremely far back.
Predator and The Thing also fulfill / bolster the Sci Fi Horror reps so they also deserve their spots as well.
-
MMR itself is hardly any different from the previous system. It hardly qualifies as an MMR system at all, and calling it that really is a misrepresentation of what we really have in DBD (this isn't a knock on any community members that choose to call it that, it's a knock on the devs for calling it an MMR system when it's really not). It really is almost no better than what we had before.
What is bad is the way that the devs went about implementing the system in the first place, which I just alluded to in that previous parentheses. The devs basically lied and tried to cover up how the system worked until they couldn't lie anymore because the data miners basically extrapolated this information from the game's files by force. It was a scummy way to put in the system and attempting to pull the wool over the eyes of the community because the devs really wanted to persuade us that this would be a positive thing.
And when I say it's no better than what we had before, that is the best case scenario. At best the system is more or less identical to what we had previously, and at worst it actually can be inconsistent with the opponents it finds for you in matchmaking. Which- now that I think about it, is still a lot like the previous system because that could also be inconsistent as well.
Not to mention they spent so much time and resources creating this system for matchmaking that most people in the community were at the very least doubtful of. I didn't really see all that many people who were truly excited for the implementation of an MMR system- even a working MMR system- there was a lot of doubt going on around the community and for very good reason. It's safe to say this wasn't a thing the community as a whole was asking for, and it's a system the devs themselves pushed for and tried to bring us around to and wasn't done by community demand or request. So you could also say this entire thing, just for little or no improvement at all, was a huge gigantic waste of time because even after it's said and done there are a lot of people that still aren't confident that the MMR system was the right move, or is even working as far as it's intended goals (AGAIN: It's not a real MMR system, so how can you accomplish real MMR goals with a fake MMR system??).
Overall it's been a very ######### situation. More often than not regardless of which side I try to look at it from, MMR seems to have been a bad decision with more negative impacts than positive ones. There are very few reasons to say that MMR was a good decision, let alone enough reasons to outweigh the negative ones (loss of trust / confidence in the dev team [add it to the list of reasons people are beginning to like them less and less], resources put into a system for over a year that doesn't even work, and the system that was created isn't even an accurate representation of player skill in the slightest).
-
It was also what made him incredibly unbalanced. I feel like you're trying to prepackage here under a different label "scary opponent" is just an insane way of saying he was incredibly unfair.
Go through a pallet and you've got two choices, drop the pallet and he hits you with PoD. Don't drop the pallet and he stops using his power and hits you with an M1. That's not scary, that's ######### dumb as all goddamn ######### hell I hated that #########. And when you're the one playing as Pyramid Head you knew full well what you were doing and understood how dumb it was as well.
In my eyes Pyramid Head was never really fixed in the first place, his chase tool is still incredibly annoying to go against and a softer version of this "Either get hit with M1 or M2" still exists to this day. He doesn't need buffs at all.
-
Scoffs
No way you even needed to ask this question.
-
I like Bendy and the Ink Machine. I think it's got a really cool visual style, and thematic premise- this idea of an artist's innocent (more or less) drawings coming to life in a very demonic way.
However, the art style is so strikingly different, I think they'd have a very difficult time translating it into DBD. Having a map in Sepia Tones and a black and white killer to match against survivors running around in full color, doesn't meld very well and the contrast I think is too much for DBD.
I think a paragraph featuring just the inky form of Bendy might be more possible, but there are still a lot of hurdles to overcome. As far as I remember there wasn't really any true violence in that game, it was more implied violence / cartoon violence, where you can tear a head off someone's shoulders off screen (like how the Projectionist dies) and it won't matter because Ink spurts out instead of blood. Not that DBD is the most graphic game in the world, but there are graphic elements to it- slashing at a survivor spews blood all over the killer's screen, survivors leak blood as they try to escape, and of course the Moris are actually pretty graphic and more in line with your standard gruesome horror deaths. Just as a few examples. Bendy and the Ink Machine doesn't really work with this either.
"Maybe" sounds a bit too hopeful, I'd probably be teetering somewhere between "Maybe" and "No" I won't say it's truly impossible but damn near pretty difficult I'd bet.
-
I was actually trying to work this out earlier because of that challenge node right before the skirt for Mikaela in the midnight grove archvies where you have to drop / break 20 pallets. I played some matches as Demo and Nemesis cause they were the first that came to mind- I probably could've done the entire thing on Demo since he's got a decent chase tool that can force the pallet drop and break it as well.
Nemesis wasn't actually as good as I thought he'd be for the challenge because when you play nemesis you realize that a lot of the time the tentacle strikes you're going for are over obstacles including short loops, pallets, and windows, so you can ignore downed pallets a lot more easily and you aren't really incentivized to break them. Unlike say the aforementioned Demogorgon example, who needs to physically be on the same side of the loop so there is a lot more incentive to shred through most if not every single pallet you come across. There's also the small point where Nemesis can't even break pallets with his power until he hits T2, so it's not like you'll be breaking them until at least a little bit of time has passed in the match.
However, I found a surprise (but not totally surprise) pick for this in the Clown. It's been awhile since I've played Clown (or gone against him) so I'd almost forgotten how much pressure he puts on survivors to drop pallets early. Unlike other chase killers like Nemesis, Oni, Demogorgon, Cannibal, Blight, Pyramid Head, who can all mess up their powers, you can't really mess up as clown.
Which is to say that, when playing as Nemesis there's a chance you miss your tentacle strike, or as Demo you miss your shred, or as Oni your Demon Strike, as Cannibal you might chainsaw into the side of the loop, or as Blight rush past the survivor you're chasing, etc.
As Clown, none of that is really possible, it really is quite difficult to mess up how you run a loop as Clown. You throw your bottle on one side of the loop, run around the other side forcing the survivor through the cloud of gas, and then more times than not they're forced to drop the pallet because they're left without many other options. You don't have to be extremely precise with Clown's ability, you'll probably be throwing the bottles straight into the ground anyway, and there's more than enough AoE in the bottles to cover an entire side of the loop so you can't really miss.
You just can't milk loops (that aren't god loops anyway) against a clown multiple times in a row, unlike say if you're garbage with Oni and always miss your demon strike. Even if you're awful with Clown survivors will still be forced to drop the pallet down regardless of how good or not you are, and this is why people don't really like Clown, because he's so one-note and there's not much room for skill expression, there just aren't that many fancy things you can do with Clown that would impress other DBD players.
Keep in mind this has nothing to do with winning by the way. Clown being able to force pallet drops doesn't mean he's good, and it certainly doesn't mean you'll win your match. It's just a fact: depending on which map you go on you can have someone instant drop every single pallet on the map and there will still be enough resources to waste your time long enough for every generator to pop.
What I am saying, is because survivors are more likely to instant drop or after a single loop, Clown is really, really, really good for that particular challenge of breaking 20 pallets. Slap chase heavy perks to make you super oppressive in chases around loops like Brutal Strength, Enduring, Spirit Fury, and Bamboozle, and you're good to go to break every pallet on the map. Doesn't mean you'll win- but you'll probably get that challenge done way quicker than any other killer probably.
-
"Extremely weak" is an overexaggeration. He's stronger than Michael or the Pig for example.
...
But yes. Some buffs would be nice.
-Ghostface main
-
Squid Game was a good show, but it's hard to see how a story like Squid Game would translate into Dead by Daylight. It's a lot like SAW, where the people don't directly kill you but the traps do.
And yes, I am full aware this is the exact same contention a potential SAW chapter got before it was released in 2018, but the difference between SAW and Squid Game- is that the people in Squid Game go willingly. Whereas in SAW, they are kidnapped against their will to prove a point and learn a valuable lesson about the mistakes they've made and to "cherish their life" as Kramer puts it. So we actually see Jigsaw's acolytes get their hands dirty, stealth around and kidnap people, and the hidden blade Amanda uses in DBD is a direct replica of one that Kramer uses in the original SAW film to slice David Tapp's throat open.
Whereas in Squid Game, although the Guards aesthetically match Dead by Daylight and its masked killers with vague anonymous identities, as far as weapons go they primarily use flat out guns to kill people. Guns with which they are practiced with mind you- they use sniper rifles in the very first game to deadly effect, but guns nonetheless which break Dead by Daylight's rule of no guns. The dev team skirted around this rule with the Deathslinger who uses an "indirect" gun in the form of the Redeemer which is the Deathslinger's personal invention, and is essentially a harpoon gun, but made with malicious intent to spear bigger bounties than fish.
I like Squid Game, but not sure how it'd work, considering nearly every kill that was made by the guards / hosts of the Squid Game, was made with some kind of assault rifle, sniper rifle, pistol, etc.
As far as Netflix goes, I wish we had managed to get a Sheriff Hopper skin in DBD. I've never bought a legendary skin, but Hopper would probably be the first I'd get if it ever went on sale.
I mean, fkn Smite was able to get ahold of him before Netflix started pulling their property out of other games. Why not DBD?? (And yes, I notice the irony here- Squid Game can't be in DBD cause guns but here in these images is Hopper holding a gun in Smite. Obviously in DBD he wouldn't have access to a revolver as a survivor.)
-
Is it a bad event? No, in any sense of the word it is not necessarily "bad".
But is it good? No. Not in the sense that this event significantly contributed to Dead by Daylight's history of events, in a way that was remarkable. This event is not remarkable, by any means.
The Midnight Grove is exactly what it was supposed to be. A do reskinned hooks / generators event, filled with a few cosmetics (that didn't have a connecting theme beyond just general "halloween" stuff I guess).
And that to me is what is disgusting.
It seems to me that people have forgotten what good events were actually like- it used to be in a former time of DBD history, that doing reskinned generators / hooks was the most basic common form of event. Reserved for the most lackluster events that didn't have a particularly strong or thrilling connection to real reasons or causes for celebration- like the Summer BBQ events, and the anniversary events.
The real events of Dead by Daylight, usually came around the Holidays, and when they released they did something unique.
In 2017
- The very first Halloween and Christmas Events (All Hallows Eve and the Winter Solstice) we ever got introduced the idea of decorating the lobby in spectacular fashion, changing the music to be reflective of the Holiday season, there were new items which glowed and were festively adorned, and so on and so forth.
- The Chinese New Year was the very first event to create a brand new item, functionally and mechanically different from anything that existed in the game at that point: the firecrackers. These were so popular they were reused as Winter Party Starters for the Winter Solstice event, and Third Year Party Starters for the third year anniversary. And of course years down the line- they would become a part of the main game in the form of Leon's teachable Flashbang.
- It's also worth mentioning, that though the anniversary events have rarely been the source of riveting unique additions- it is worth noting they did contribute in one major way: the 1st year anniversary introduced the beloved Escape Cake, Survivor Pudding, and Bloody Party Streamers offerings. They were meant to be limited time offerings but eventually became permanent to the base game- and would serve as the predecessors for our yearly Gruesome / Ghastly Gateau etc. offerings
In 2018,
- The Hallowed Blight was first introduced and was the most significant addition to lore that had ever been created up until that point, this was pre-archives so they released new lore entries every day for you to read right on booting up the game. Animatics were created which told the story of the Alchemist, and how he kidnapped and experimented on killers with the Blight Serum, a completely new revelation considering up until this point we didn't know if it was possible for anyone to fight back against the killers. The Blight itself introduced an amazing thematically appropriate secondary objective, players had to milk visceral cankers to fill their vials of Putrid Serum. Do this enough times and you would be rewarded with some of the most detailed and well crafted cosmetics to date- the Blighted cosmetics available for five killers, and two survivors.
In 2019,
- The Lunar New Year Moonrise event introduced a brand new capture the flag esque secondary objective, survivors or killers had to find Lunar New Year Lanterns, the former had to successfully carry them until they escaped at the end of the match- if you were downed it would be "dropped" and would respawn somewhere else on the map.While the latter had to destroy the lanterns.
2017-2019 were probably the brightest years of DBD's life in terms of events, because since then the devs have mired in mediocrity. Making very little effort to create the plans for new innovations and relying on tired, played out event ideas. In 2020: The Scarlet Swarm Lunar new year event was a do reskinned generators / hooks event, The Eternal Blight was a do reskinned generators / hooks event (there was no proper Christmas event, instead an advent calendar rewarding players for logging in on a daily basis). In 2021: The Gilded Stampede Lunar New Year event was the same, the fifth year anniversary was the same, and now the Halloween Midnight grove event is also the victim of this plague of repeated nonsense.
Halloween, the most IMPORTANT time of the year for Dead by Daylight- is not worth anything more than a few glowing candles on some generators, and a separate two pages of the archives to grind through. I guess we have the pumpkins- but that's not even particularly new, considering they already introduced that idea with their mini Gnome Chompski event where you had to run around at the end of the match to find, kick, and destroy the gnomes.
You'd think at least one dev on the team would maybe even just possibly wonder if they were over-saturating this idea of "doing reskinned generators."
Frankly, I'm sick of doing generators that look slightly different. It was a fun, simple, and novel idea when they came up with it four years ago for the first Chinese new year event in 2017, but it's absolutely been milked to oblivion by now. Events are the perfect opportunity for Dead by Daylight to stretch its legs out of the normality of the established traditional gameplay cycle, and try something new for just a few short days / weeks.
And contrary to popular belief amongst the dev team- throwing free rewards at the community does NOT make an event an event. Shouting at the top of your lungs "free Bloodpoints!! We got free bloodpoints here!!" does NOT make an event.
Is it bad? No. But it sure is a hell of a lot more mediocre than it could have been, and that sense of dissatisfaction- that they could have done something more, is what really bugs me.
What I find really disturbing though,
Is that it seems to me that if the devs keep this up long enough, the community will forget the times when the devs actually tried. The times when the devs actually worked to innovate, and create new and unique mechanics which actually changed up the pace of the game for a limited time. Lobby decorations and designs that didn't just kind of fade into the scenery as part of the background. Music that wasn't soft and unnoticeable, but emphatic, energetic, and festive.
To the point where you've got seven people saying this was a good or great event, and one person saying this was the best halloween event of all time.
-
@AnObserver said:
IMO could be a combination of:
- nearly perfect Memory wipe.
- Multiverse leaning heavily into the infinite aspect.
- Players are only viewing a sub-set of the Trials/The Player view is not linear with the "timeline" of The Entity's realm.
But it could be other things.
This ^
Also survivors do stop being afraid. When that happens, they are discarded as they are no longer sources of powerful emotions that the entity can draw from.
The survivors we play as are unique, since they in particular seem to have stronger wills than others who wind up in the entity's realm. A stronger sense of hope, motivation, resourcefulness, or a combination of the three that keeps them going probably longer than most.
Or like how AnObserver mentioned, we're playing as Survivors who have already lost their hope and Dead by Daylight is just an endless story of the infinite trials they were subject to before they finally gave in. Ironically enough, this is probably seen / read by the Observer, who is always looking for an escape while he's locked away. The trials we play through have already happened, and the Observer is just watching the playback, searching (perhaps in vain) for a secret answer, or a clue, that will free him from his imprisonment.
No definitive answer, although many different answers fit. I guess you could say it's up to interpretation almost.
-
None.
-
Next chapter specifically is probably gonna be an original one all things considered.
-
The Kindred thing is kinda eh, I'm not sure about that- that seems really overloaded as far as base kit survivor goes. Although I can understand the need to somehow bridge the gap between the information solo survivors have access o and SWF, I just am a bit hesitant to say "Basekit kindred" is the answer to that.
As for corrupt intervention I can easily say no to that. However, the motivation for why that might sound nice is clearly identifiable. I agree there should be some kind of slowdown in the early game to prevent survivors from gen rushing right out the gate. Anybody who's anybody knows that the early game is the hardest part for killer, because you've got four survivors all healthy and no pressure on the map. If you've been running Lethal Pursuer you can see clearly how survivors all spread out on 4 different generators all across the map leads them to popping three of them if you can't secure your first down quickly and efficiently, and snowball some pressure moving from one survivor to the next interrupting their progress.
And weak killers without map mobility or poor chase tools especially suffer from this.
I still think that Scott Jund's "pre-game collapse" is a great idea and I don't buy it when the devs say that "every form of the idea was unfun or broken" especially with the way the idea was first proposed. I don't see how a general slowdown that applies to all survivors until a chase is initiated can somehow be unfun or broken.
And if the answer to that is that in tandem with slowdown perks the slow becomes too oppressive- then why not just deactivate those while the pre-game collapse occurs? Hell, nerf slowdown perks across the board to account for the new base kit buffs killers are getting. This is what they do all the time when balancing specific killers, they buff the killer's base kit and nerf their add-ons slightly to accommodate those changes to make killers less add-on reliant. There's a WAY that the pre-game collapse is possible and I just can't accept the answer: "we tried it, we didn't like it, didn't work. So we're going to stop looking into it." like HUH?? What the Hell is that answer!???
So much like what I said about Kindred, I see that there's a need there- an understandable one that I think many players can empathize with, but again- I don't think applying Corrupt Intervention itself specifically is the answer. A base kit mechanic that slows down survivors just slightly and prevents that nightmare scenario of 3 generators popping off at the beginning. Even if that's not pre-game collapse or base kit corrupt or whatever, there's an idea out there that hasn't been tried yet that would solve this issue.
-
@Tr1nity said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2595170#Comment_2595170
Look I only had 10 poll options, I would have done both, but than I can't say other, which people call out, if I say other, than I can't mention neutral, god.
I can see right away which poll options you could get rid of to make space so don't act like you had no other choice my dude. You definitely did.
Primarily: I don't see the reason to have "good" and "perfect" as separate poll options. Frankly NOTHING in this game is perfect, and you can assume with reasonable certainty nobody (or at least very few people) are going to vote for that poll option. There's also just the whole idea that absolutely nothing in this world is perfect, everything is flawed in some way, and everything can be improved upon. Case in point, currently only 1 killer main said it was a perfect update, and no survivor mains said it was perfect as of writing. Ergo: Delete the "perfect" options.
Secondly: If you're putting "Other" there's little reason to put "Neutral" especially if you're running low on poll options. It would be pretty fair to say that the people voting neutral, likely have something more to say than just it's "good / bad" and these are the people that might be more likely to post comments since they have conflicting thoughts or feelings about the update. Recognizing both positive and negative impacts which lead them to more of a middle ground neutral position. "Other" encapsulates these opinions really well, as they are the "other" opinions that are neither good nor bad. It's also probably not as important to make a distinction between a survivor "other" opinion and a killer "other" opinion, since their default player perspective is not leading them to a bias toward good or bad, but a detailed neutral ground opinion. Ergo: Delete the "neutral" options, and merge the "Other" options.
And bam. I've just opened up 5 poll option slots for you, leaving your poll with a cohesive and succinct: "Good / Bad - Survivor, Good / Bad - Killer, and Other" The extra space you could use not only to provide a place for the players who play both sides (a sizeable portion of the community) but also whatever else you wanted to.
And if you still don't think this is somehow a good idea as far as your poll goes, I would make the argument it's less important to provide a spectrum of poll option responses from "bad to perfect", than it is to not alienate a literal chunk of the common playerbase who play dead by daylight as a whole in both roles.
People can speak for themselves, and you don't need to provide a perfectly accurate poll option for everybody from "Bad, Slightly bad, to Neutral, to Good, to Perfect" If they have those things to say they'll say it, and it's more important to create poll options that align with their viewpoints well enough that you can clearly see what they voted for first, and then their more detailed thoughts in their comment below.
-
Everytime I play on The Game as killer, I realize just how much I would rather play on Hawkins, and can't believe there are people that actually like that Hawkins is leaving. Compared to The Game, Hawkins may as well be Coal Tower.
Too many Damn pallets on that map, every pallet is safe as all hell, and it's just a pain to play on through and through. I'm wishing now that it was the SAW license that had pulled out, rather than the Stranger Things license.
-
Good - Both sides
I just can't understand why polls are always created to further pit survivors against killers and vice versa. As if the people that play both sides just don't exist.
-
I actually like the first three answers equally. I like the opportunity to debate different viewpoints, as much as I like just reading some lighthearted nonsense, and the overall sense of community that arises from the different interactions you can have on the forums.
I also have few people to talk about DBD with IRL, especially with the amount of hours I've racked up. I'm really the only one in my friend group that plays on a consistent and regular basis, so I can't have super detailed conversations with anybody else that isn't just me going on a monologue about something.
-
Is this even a question?
-
I'd have more fun playing Trapper if I wasn't getting gen. rushed all the flipping time. It's not even about winning or losing, it's ust really hard to have fun playing a killer when you hardly have the opportunity to use your power to a significant enough degree that it actually has a noticeable impact on a match.
That being said, I haven't played Trapper since the mid-chapter patch rolled out so I haven't tried all the nice new changes he got. Maybe I'll have a better time once I've given him another shot.
-
Hands down The Big Daddy has to be the most physically imposing of all these options. Clad in a giant atmospheric diving suit and equipped with an oversized metal drill on one arm, the sheer size and weight of this thing that used to be human puts it into a category unto its own.
-
I would argue it's more important to nerf / tune Spine Chill out of the Resilience / Spine Chill combo. Spine Chill is a stupidly broken perk that manages to fly under the radar when it comes to conversations about "OP / meta perks" but I would genuinely say it is one of the most powerful non-exhaustion perks that exists in the game for survivors. Resilience is small beans compared to Spine Chill which completely neuters an entire class of killers (stealth killers) and allows survivors to act preemptively when equipped with the knowledge that the killer is coming in their direction. In a "Hold W Meta" this is huge, as it more or less ensures that survivors can put serious distance between the killer and themselves in nearly any and every circumstance no matter what. And that's only have of the conversation because I didn't even mention Spine Chill helps in chases, and objectives with that aforementioned increased vault speed / gen. repair speed.
Spine Chill is also laughably more powerful than Premonition, which may as well be completely forgotten about in the presence of Spine Chill. So for the sake of premonition, for the sake of stealth killers that don't need such an obvious and direct counter as Spine Chill, and for the sake of tuning down the "Resilience / Spine Chill" perk combination that OP mentioned, we should be looking at Spine Chill rather than Resilience of all things. (And I say this with 100% confidence as someone who loves Spine Chill, I keep it in my build as a mainstay perk on basically every survivor I have access to it on)
Resilience is fine because it at least requires something of the player. Although I absolutely agree that the downsides of Resilience can easily be mitigated with a medkit, or any number of perks like Adrenaline, Self Care, Pharmacy, Boon: Circle of Healing, etc. Resilience at least has those downsides, and it must always be worked around no matter what to get the full utility of the perk. (Again, unlike Spine Chill which acts passively, at all times, without a cooldown, and requires absolutely nothing of the player except the perk slot alone)
So long story short, Resilience is fine, and Spine Chill is actually low key stupidly overloaded.
-
After playing DBD for five years since 2016- I've heard the "If *blank- insert horror game here* quite a number of times already. F13, Last Year, Hide or Die, I've seen plenty of titles fill in that open statement and they've all either 1. failed to live up to expectation or even worse 2. actually failed and died, unable to sustain even a small playerbase.
Also, we in the community like to think that Dead by Daylight is somehow this exceptional breeding ground for bugs because of some obscure "spaghetti code" (even though that was supposedly cleaned up years ago) or the devs are somehow incompetent, but the truth is virtually all of DBD's competitors in the past have equally suffered from bugs, optimization issues, and more. DBD is not some statistically significant outlier, it has bugs yes, but so does nearly every other game.
DBD earns its criticism because people love DBD. It's very easy to see that the developers have the resources, the consistent player numbers, the established connections, and the reputation, to make some truly fantastic changes that would benefit the game and its playerbase, but they chose not to.
If people were quiet about Dead by Daylight that is what would be concerning- because it would show that people don't care. But always, DBD has been if nothing else, a lively and chaotic place filled with passionate players who raise their voices to show their concerns about changes or the path forward. On multiple platforms: Youtube, Twitch, Twitter, these here forums, conversations about Dead by Daylight never seems to cease and like it or not that is a good thing for DBD.
If anything, I'm more concerned about the games coming into the genre than I am about Dead by Daylight. Because as we've already pointed out- historically speaking DBD competitors haven't had the longest of life spans, and at best have enjoyed limited success. Even BHVRs own Deathgarden couldn't compete with its older sister in the family.
So like others, I'm hoping that a cool coexistence can be achieved for VHS' sake- and that hopefully a game that can actually prove its salt, and stick around for a good long while, will push DBD to become a better game.
-
I haven't seen the movie myself, but from what I understand don't you not actually see the Blair Witch herself / itself even in the actual film? Its that quintessential idea of "the greatest fear is the fear of the unknown" and in the Blair Witch Project the unknown takes the form of this found footage story where we learn about three student filmmakers who mysteriously disappear after looking into the local legend.
By giving the Blair Witch an actual form, like The Hag or something- you end up stripping a theme that is central to the very identity of that film and the license itself.
Also the power itself seems really strange with how it treats movement speeds. At first, I naturally thought 20% movement speed referred to killer speeds over survivor as in +20%, so 120%, but then earlier in the power an explicit distinction is made when it seems that the Blair Witch moves at 250% rather than I guess would be +150% so are you meaning to tell me this killer moves at actual 20% movement speed??? The inconsistency is confusing and very off-putting.
And if it's just a normal fast moving killer, than isn't this just a weirdly overbuffed Wraith?
The whole thing from concept to power just screams like a very dubious addition to me, so I'm actually going to have to pass on this one.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2565814#Comment_2565814
Boon totems being something the killer can break would mean they're ultimately completely insignificant. The survivor puts it down, the killer breaks it, nobody got to interact with the fun mechanic for any longer than it takes for the killer to go step on it. It wouldn't be a safe haven for survivors that draws them away from generators and puts them out of position in exchange for utility buffs, it'd be one annoying chore for the killer to juggle on top of everything else the killer has to deal with.
I think people are way too caught up on these being "survivor hex totems", which they aren't. They're not supposed to function the same way.
This is actually a really good way to explain this topic. Well done +1
Even if it's already been said before, I agree that Boon Totems aren't balanced the exact same way that Hex Totems are. Hex: Totems provide you with extremely powerful, game changing abilities that affect all survivors across the entire map. Their entire balance is based around the "risk vs. reward" model- you get a really great and powerful perk, but in exchange you run the risk of it being eventually destroyed permanently at some point during the trial.
Whereas Boon Totems provide the aforementioned "safe havens" smaller areas of limited space where a survivor is blessed with positive effects, and though they are strong, they aren't as strong as their Hex Totem counterparts comparatively speaking. They're not only restrained by their limited range- but also in that they take time to set up not just in physical action speed, but also in the time it might take to run across the map to get back to a totem that you had previously blessed.
Not to mention that Boon Totems are easier to find than their Hex Totem counterparts. as there's a wide audio that extends to a range of 24 meters. Killers are notified more or less exactly where a boon totem exists, and given that they move faster than survivors do, it really doesn't take all that much to find it quickly and stamp it out in only a second or so. So I don't fully believe all that "UgH ItS AnOtHeR KiLlEr ObJeCtIvE tO wAsTe TiMe" from what I've heard it really doesn't take all that much to be passing by as killer and quickly get rid of it.
Let me put it this way: if Boon Totems are going to be treated the same way as Hex Totems, I expect they get the same positive treatment as well. Meaning perks like Circle of Healing should be mapwide affects, allowing all survivors to heal themselves without a medkit at 100% speed until the associated Boon totem has been cleansed. Boon Totems should also not exude a 24 meter audio cue, and killers should instead be able to find them based solely off the small crackle of fire that survivors must keenly listen for to find Hex: Totems.
So tell me: is that what you guys want? Fair is fair after all. (Seriously, it feels like I'm talking to kids here.)
If you want Boon Totems to get the same treatment as Hex Totems, then by all means give it. But don't think for a second that this does not come with its downsides for the players that seek these changes in the first place.
I also think this is just part of that Infamous Dead By Daylight Community Knee Jerk Reactions outcry that the community has made itself so well known for, update after update, patch after patch, year after year. Give it a few weeks and we'll see what it's like afterward.
It's important to remember that the community has to be mindful of the feedback it gives, especially feedback based on little to no experience which should probably be taken with a grain of salt in most cases.
(Although not all cases, I'm extremely skeptical about the Deathslinger changes and think there's a reasonable enough case to say they should probably be reverted without needing too much more extensive testing for example).
-
@Aurelle said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2574772#Comment_2574772
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2575721#Comment_2575721
These are what the portraits look like now:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/V9RYX2OJOEPR/dbdnewsurvivorportraits.png
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/ZO7Y3PVD9PC8/dbdnewsurvivorportraits2.png
Only Kate, Nea, David, Jake, Quentin, and Feng's portraits were changed so far.
I won't say they look worse necessarily, undoubtedly they're higher res images of the survivors themselves.
I think the problem is that the art style is so undoubtedly disjointed from the other survivors of the cast that the result is they seem so completely and utterly out of place. That contrast is what's ugly and disgusting, not really how each survivor appears individually.
Although on a side note, I will say that the lighting the survivors seem to share across all of them looks worse on the new portraits. It makes them appear as though they're glistening, like they're slick with some kind of oil / sweat, or that they're plastic and look like a figure as a collector's item.
Though I get why the dev team is doing it- since they've updated the character models that are used in game they've got to update the portfolio images as well, it was especially noticeable for characters like Jake and Nea- their faces and hair changed completely to the point that you might not recognize them as the same character between the portfolio picture and how they actually appear in game.
But yes, I do see the problem here.
EDIT: I think the worst one has gotta be Feng Min because of the hair. I think the dev team should maybe reconsider just straight up porting the models into the portfolio's, I think there's nothing wrong with having an artistic representation of each character that isn't 100% representative of how they appear in game. Just similar enough to provide the unique details of each character which make them identifiable. This is partly why people tinker with the game files to mod the icons for perks, items, and characters as well- they have unique art styles which make them attractive options if you want to mess with how the game is visually presented.
-
I'll continue to play, but it's just not going to feel the same anymore.
There were always a few signs and hints that BHVR was low key greedy: the price points for their cosmetic store (Legendary skins 3/4ths the cost of the base game, haphazard and nonsensical ways of choosing which cosmetics are locked behind a paywall, some characters having most all of their available cosmetics locked behind paywalls [hillbilly]), how intense the grind is to unlock any single piece of content for free with shards, their unwillingness to reduce the grind and reward players appropriately for prestiging or raising their devotion and overall change the game in accordance with the amount of content it actually has and things of that nature, the archives introducing filler content (charms / recolors) in exchange for an incredible amount of time it takes to finish, etc...
But this has gotta be the final nail in the coffin. BHVR has gorged itself on its own success and it has milked both its popularity and its playerbase for its own financial gain, time and time again. The NFT business is just another example of BHVR overreaching again.