Skaels
Skaels
About
- Username
- Skaels
- Joined
- Visits
- 50
- Last Active
Comments
-
The old HUD was perfect.
The only brightside I see in this, is that the devs doing the UI are not the same devs who work on bugs, hitboxes etc. So hopefully the other devs working on the big problems are hard at work, while the UI team just breaks the UI for no reason.
-
@LastShoe said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1945199#Comment_1945199
Ok, my definition of meta is the same, but indeed, i was talking exclusively on ultimate version of meta, which is the case (at least in my opinion) in DbD and that should change.
I agree, stale metas are boring. I'd like some use for the other 90% of my perks and some customization options. Maybe perks for different playstyles, rather than if I don't use X perks I get run over.
-
@ShamelessPigMain said:
Meta perks are annoying, but the solution has to be a little more nuanced; people would kill themselves on hook until their perk cooldowns finished, and only actually try on those games where they can run meta perks, which wouldn't solve the problem at all.
A more advisable suggestion would be to make more meta perks. Diversion, autodidact, deathbound, huntress' lullaby, etc. are all really, really fun, but aren't meta. Buffing these perks to the ranks of meta perks would let people run interesting and creative builds that aren't repetitive and old.
I'm a fan of buffing vs nerfing. The thing to watch out for with that, is power creep.
-
@OrangeChonk said:
They seem adamant on making sure the names do not get cut off. I don't know if it's a good idea might look like crap but maybe they should try the horizontal but with staggered names. Maybe the name and health bar is swapped on survivor 2 and 4, this way the names can be long and not cut off by anything.
I think they are too worried about names. With the new portraits we don't need names.
-
@LastShoe said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1943994#Comment_1943994
Uhm... that's the point, there are multiple characters on each lane and there is such thing as counterpick. Not one defined meta THAT OUTSHINES EVERYTHING. The example of a game that had this problem to a ridiculous degree is overwatch, where dive was so powerful, that there was no point of doing anything else, so games were a constant mirror matches.
Uhm... that's the point
Okay, I think we need to define the definition of meta then before we continue. For me, this is how I see the word "meta". A meta is a strict adherence to a certain pattern of gameplay, usually derived from the community via external 3rd party websites, simulations, guides, or from watching pro play.
The example of a game that had this problem to a ridiculous degree is overwatch, where dive was so powerful, that there was no point of doing anything else, so games were a constant mirror matches.
The "meta" for a given time for OW for example could be said like this. The beginning seasons in OWL, dive was the "meta" because it performed the best and it was easier to copy the meta than to try and counter. This is more present in pro play, because we are talking maxed skill levels, however it also bled into the ranked modes because players emulate the pro scene. Then there was Brigitte, who directly hard countered dive, the meta shifted towards snipers and eventually grew into GOATS. This is an over simplification and I may have the timeline wrong but it's a hypothetical. So yes you're right OW is a better example than League for having a meta, but there is a reason. OW does not have a draft, limit each hero to 1 player, or stop players from swapping mid game.
there are multiple characters on each lane and there is such thing as counterpick. Not one defined meta THAT OUTSHINES EVERYTHING.
League does however, still have a meta. If there was no meta, we would not have ten different websites telling players what items to use and which champions are S tier for that patch. There are champions with less than 1% played, while others are banned 75% of the time. In this recent tournament alone, Kai'sa had 100% participation in games, meaning she was either picked or banned for every game of the LEC tournament. Their system has more checks and balances to stop a meta, due to bans and counterpicks, it's not near as bad or stale as OW but I disagree that there isn't a meta.
meta THAT OUTSHINES EVERYTHING.
edit: I would like to be clear here. I'm not defining meta as something that is 100% replicated all the time and is better than everything. There are degrees this and to simplify it to being OP is imo not correct. You are describing a broken system, where there is no real choice. Sure this is the ultimate version of a meta, but meta is not simply OP or broken. Some metas are worse than others and some do outshine everything (GOATS for example).
-
@Mastermind said:
There will always be a META. You can't stop that. BUT I did get two ideas:
- A kind of Randomizer game mode where both the killer and the survivors get a fully randomized, fully decked loadout which won't use up any items, addons or offerings but not allow you to choose literally anything. This stems from the time I played Hearthstone and I really enjoyed playing the brawl where both sides get completely random decks because then it's a game of adaptability, not one side being more META than the other. It would be a more fun gamemode where you can't be sweaty as much, play with perks you never see and just challenge yourself.
- Every day you might get a set of 4 perks that each give you +25% extra BP when you use them in a game for one game or alternatively, have the game set a single "boosted" perk from the perks you own after every match. This alternative might be problematic though if people would go out of their way to only unlock the default and the META perks as the game would boost the META perks most of the time in those cases. Or thirdly, maybe just make the boosted perk last for one day and never be any of the META perks. (This could probably get decided on perk pick rate data.)
- If the devs won't make a Solo Survivor Mode, where there's no SWF. I don't think they will divide the player base to make a randomizer mode. There's a lot of cool ideas for other modes that they won't do.
- Boosted perks would be interesting, maybe as a reward on the weekly missions. Use "x" perk.
-
@LastShoe said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1943374#Comment_1943374
But in good games there is not a 1 defined meta that completely outshines everything.
Also, if you want to give an example of LoL, this game has this nice trick of metaswitch. All the time multiple buffs, nerfs and new heroes makeit so meta switches from favoring certain characters to favor the others.
The problem is this meta switch makes some characters underpowered and some unpowered for some time, behaviour won't do this because they want to see only perfect 50/50 statistics for all.
"But in good games there is not a 1 defined meta that completely outshines everything.
Also, if you want to give an example of LoL, this game has this nice trick of metaswitch. All the time multiple buffs, nerfs and new heroes makeit so meta switches from favoring certain characters to favor the others."
Are you really trying to use LoL as an example of a game that does not have defined meta?
Sure it switches with patches, but it does not mean there is not a defined meta. Look at the tournaments, where you see the same 3 top laners. This time it was Gnar, Renek, Camille, and Gragas. That is one small example, then look at sites like op.gg which have defined metrics and percentages for what are the best runes and items. This entire game is defined by a meta.
Based on your argument if DBD nerfed and changed perks enough to where the meta changed every patch it would not have a defined meta. There would still be a meta though. The only way to not have a meta is to have perfect balance, please find a game where there is perfect balance and no "best way" to choose builds.
-
@Lexilogo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1943733#Comment_1943733
The two issues with such an idea:
- Permanently limit perk combinations by developer intent instead of allowing for full player creativity, running a build without Legendary Perks would presumably put you at a significant disadvantage
- Kicks the can down the road for Perk balancing to restart the meta instead of genuinely fixing it. Now, it's just a contest as to what's the best Legendary Perk now.
And that's putting aside the fact it'd need a sweeping Perk overhaul that'd quite likely bugger up the balance. It's honestly especially unsuited to Dead by Daylight thanks to the Exhaustion system already being a thing, too.
True, in a way exhaustion is a form of limiting perks to one of a type. I don't think my idea would be the best idea, but it's an idea. There's a reason these guys make $$$.
-
@Lexilogo said:
Creating a hard cooldown for Perks isn't a good idea at all. That kind of hard punishment and lockout of preferred playstyles isn't healthy for the game or fun.
If you want to encourage players to use other Perks, and you're not taking balance changes into account, (which will obviously help A LOT especially for Survivor perks) I would recommend features like:
- Random "Bloodpoint Boons" that attach themselves to Perks every game. Each buff increases postgame BPs by something like 25%, and randomly attach themselves to Perks you own each game, with more boons being assigned depending on how many Perks you own. (potentially, having another boon avaliable for leaving an empty perk slot that comes in every now and then might also help)
- Prestige features for using Perks. For example, having stat tracking features for Perks that track not only specific things that Perk did for you (eg. "Generators Popped", "Killers Stunned", etc) but also how many times you have escaped, and how many Survivors you have killed, with that Perk equipped total between all Survivors/Killers. These could reward points associated with that specific Perk, with BP/Shard bonuses for reaching certain milestones, and cosmetic features like being able to change the Perk's background colour (eg. being able to equip it with a Legendary background) to give experienced players something to grind towards, especially if they're willing to try unorthodox Perk builds and try to Legendary out every single Perk.
One idea could be to distribute the perks into tiers. Take the perks which are most powerful/meta builds, make them legendary so you can only use one at a time. Kind of like how league is revamping their item system.
-
That's true, if we rated all perks by a percentage, I wonder how much better the meta perks are.
-
Unfortunately, meta is going to be in every game you play. Devs have a hard job to make sure everything is balanced. If they simply nerf the meta into the ground, another one will form. It's present in all games, Magic the gathering, Yugioh, CoD, WoW, LoL, there are literally entire websites devoted to defining the meta. This is not just a DBD problem, it's a gaming problem. The sphere of information is such that we find the best way to do anything in games.
-
It's amazing the devs responded so quick with this, I feel hope in my widdle heart.
If the portaits were horizontal this would be perfect. Pretty much where they were before.
-
Weck,
I agree many games put their HUD in all 4 corners, including games from different genres. Moving everything to the bottom of the screen and making it minimalistic is not a "standard" or objectively superior HUD for all games. The fact that most games spread things out is not a justification for DBD being improved by copying their style. DBD is arguably a very unique game. It has an incredible need to pay attention to the smallest movement or detail on your screen. Seeing the outline of a survivor moving in the distance, in the shadows, could swing the momentum of the game. If we look at the screen in terms of priority of visual clarity. I would rate the center as the highest, this is the focus for most games, nothing to say here. The left and right edges are second in priority, you could see a survivor on the edge of vision creeping around in the fog, as a killer you are constantly scanning when looking for survivors, we don't just tunnel vision. The top sliver of the edge, not much going on. The bottom panel is usually covered by your hands already, so it's free space to put HUD elements, also it's the least likely place a survivor would be hiding, literally at your feet.
The same case could be made for all games, the focus is in the center, however I would say that the need for visual clarity is higher in DBD, because you are looking for survivors, or killers often at long distances and you are scanning this part of your screen from end to end while doing gens or while hunting. The bottom of the screen is not as highly valued, because as a killer you are first person and if someone was in the bottom portion of your screen, you would be standing on top of them already, or for survivors that would be right next to you and you would be hearing chase music, except of course pig or something sneaking up from behind and to the side.
It could be argued that in FPS you are looking for a tiny spec of a head peeping out, to shoot them. I agree, however often times you are scoped in and therefore the HUD is a moot point.
Fighting games, you are solely focused on the opponent the majority of the time, and the HUD is almost a peripheral connection.
RPG games, well they have moments of action, where you are focused on combat and then yes there is plenty of time to look at your minimap, items, etc.
DBD is a race against the clock from the moment it starts, there is no downtime. The placement of the HUD which creates the least obstructed HUD, with the simplest icons, to promote fast swaps of information is ideal.
-
@Alice_pbg said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1936759#Comment_1936759
The maximum amount of air your lungs can hold is about 6 liters
I think this is what Weck needs
-
@Alice_pbg said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1935161#Comment_1935161
Way to ignore everything else.
everything else was just more of the same
In DBD, i don't just need to know the health state. I need to know:
Which survivor is hurt? (there are 4 of them)
and you get that from the old hud how?
which skins are they wearing? (new portraits don't show the skin)
and you get that from the old hud how?
Who was most recently hooked? (DS is a thing)
and you get that from the old hud how?
Who is on the last hook? (who can i remove)
What other status effects do they have?
Did one just recently get healed? (Are they by themselves or did a teammate heal them?)
how many times do I need to say "and you get that from the old hud how?"
jesus... are you even trying?
What is the status of the current gens?
right there on the top...you glance at it and you see it.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1935125#Comment_1935125
all you're doing is retroactively justifying the old one over the new one. "I like the old one, so the things it did MUST be right. Therefore I declare these 'rules' for making huds"
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1935636#Comment_1935636
This is an immersive horror game. So no, having [BAD WORD] all over the screen is not a good idea.
because? gonna explain your point of view at any point?
ALSO how many fighting games have randomly decided to make the health bars vertical on the edges of the screen?
after street fighter 2? none that I know of. health bars at the top draining towards the center with the timer in the middle basically became an unbreakable rule.
you literallly die in 1 hit on divekick, and they still felt the need to put it there. 🤷♀️
it's like moving with wasd... it's insanely hard to change that and expect success. (unless you're called smash bros of course)
This is such a special case, that it just doesn't apply to DBD. there are no set in stones rule like those.
I'm sure based on your theory there is no wrong way to do it.
I've said there no objectively best hud. you obviously can still make bad ones.
pay attention.
BUT do you think the community would enjoy it? No? Why?Because ITS BEEN AT THE TOP FOR YEARS AND THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH IT
if only you payed attention... you might have realized you're making a strawman.
on the topic of health bars in fighting games, they have improved it a lot. but I'll just let people that play fighting games more explain it
https://www.reddit.com/r/Fighters/comments/e7st75/what_fighting_game_do_you_think_has_the_best_ui/
nothing wrong with something != can't be improved
If the FGC has an unbreakable rule about health bars, even though there is no correct way to do it. How is that different from DBD having a preferred layout as per the community? Why break something that was working fine? That's my point, I don't have time to sit here and debate you on every minute detail. The 6k posts in the pinned topic, the 100+ threads made, the backlash on twitter, steam and discord speaks for itself.
edit:
Oh and about you wanting an explanation for DBD being a horror game. I figured it was obvious. Most horror games utilizie a minimalistic hud to increase immersion.
To go back to your post with pics of FPS games. In hardcore mode, the HUD is mostly removed to increase difficulty but also immersion.
-
It's pretty pointless and I hate clutter. I wouldn't care if it was gone. Make it small and in the corner and I'm fine with that too.
-
@Alice_pbg said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1933926#Comment_1933926
it is. because you can't demonstrate that one is better than the other.
all you can do, is say you like one more than the other.
for instance...
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/VUgC3FBzQ_0/maxresdefault.jpg
top left you have a mini map, bottom left health, top right score and bottom right ammo.
is this a bad HUD because stuff is spread out?
https://www.wsgf.org/f/u/imagecache/node-gallery-display/contrib/dr/62/ingame_4x3.jpg
on the top you have the match timer (and alive/dead players + characters after it starts)
bottom left you have an image of you + health
bottom middle there's the progress of the game
bottom right power + ammo.
again, is this bad? would it be better if all of this was in the same corner?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9a/Dead_Space_2_Screen.jpg
now, you have the health on the character spine, the ammo on the gun and the stasis on his back to the right.
is this bad? would it be better if the info was all on the corner?
https://www.wasd.pt/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/zelda-breath-of-the-wild-screen.jpg
top left you have helth + directional buttons.
bottom right minimap, temperature, sound and time of day with weather
would it be better with everything on the same corner?
information on most corners again...
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/krQM5xG1gOg/maxresdefault.jpg
stuff quite literally all around the screen...
do I need to go on?
I'm going on anyway
https://cdn.videogamesblogger.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Super-Mario-Odyssey-Screen-23.jpg
oh look... information on more than on corner of the screen...
https://gaming-age.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Switch_NSO_DonkeyKongCountry2.jpg
oh look...no information at all until you collect something...
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/pt/5/59/Street-fighter-v-laura-karin_screen.jpg
information on the top and the bottom of the screen... on a game that demands fast reaction time to the information on screen... oh wow...
it's almost like most games put the information on more than one place on the screen, and looking at them is not hard...
but instead of showing how spreading the information on the screen is literally the normal thing to do... let's focus on why a optimal hud, is subjective.
back to the dead space screen. if the health and ammo was a number on the corner, it would probably be easier to read, so you can say "that's optimal", like I showed before, having information spread out is not an issue...but let's pretend you have a point here...
you can argue that hacing the hud work in the way it does makes you look around more, increasing a bit the horror part of the game, since your focus shifts to different parts of the screen.
so while one is easier to read, the other is more in tune with the horror feel of the game.
so go ahead. which is the optimal hud? to show it's objective, you gotta be able to demonstrate it's better than the other option in every way
This is an immersive horror game. So no, having ######### all over the screen is not a good idea. ALSO how many fighting games have randomly decided to make the health bars vertical on the edges of the screen? I'm sure based on your theory there is no wrong way to do it. BUT do you think the community would enjoy it? No? Why? Because ITS BEEN AT THE TOP FOR YEARS AND THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH IT
-
The sad part is that there are various youtube videos, 20 page threads bringing up these very issues, all back in January. Devs said let's wait for console players to try it out.
They are only listening now because the game is a dumpster fire.
-
Boy this thread is really blowing up compared to the 60 page banger on the full criticism and feedback at the top of the page. It's pretty obvious everyone loves it. Otherwise why would steam be -300% in negative reviews and the Discord is being spammed with cooking recipes to drown out the haters.
This game is on fire right now, be afraid.
-
It does say edited by MandyTalk.
-
Dancing in a horror game. Easing tensions in a horror game...maybe BHVR will hire you?
-
@Mileena_Kahn said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1933856#Comment_1933856
The OP wants positivity and no negativity. You’re trying to start the fire. Let’s just leave it at that.
Nah I just find it ironic. Do what you want.
-
@IronKnight55 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1931870#Comment_1931870
I like everything. I've already said this. Not everyone hates it.
It's fine if you like it. Objectively you are in the minority, maybe 2% like it and voice their opinion. This isn't a cult, you are allowed to like it.
-
@Mileena_Kahn said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1933743#Comment_1933743
Oh god please don’t be THAT person.
Please don't be negative, we can't do that.
edit: Should we start flaming people who voice their praise for changes in the other discussion topics? Are we not allowed to communicate. Why the seperation?
-
Asking for no negative feedback in a forum dedicated to feedback.
-
Please keep the feedback informative. Remember that the mods who run this forum are not necessarily the same people making the decisions we're upset about.
Was feedback ignored on these forums? Yes
Are they making an effort to sticky and consolidate our feedback now? Yes, so let's try to work with them rather than against.
As ######### as the situation is, no dev is going to purposefully make their game worse.
-
This is a well informed post and I'm sure everyone who shares your view would appreciate it if you posted it on the pinned post, to bring more attention to this topic!
-
New UI:
Positives:
- Survivor Icon makes it easier to know who has DS.
- Hook counter is helpful generally
Negatives:
- Information is too spread out
- Blocks vision on the left side
- Too bright/immersion breaking, before it was subtle and at the bottom so you could look at it when you needed to
- The red slashes are too bright/flashy, once again...distracting
- Overall it looks cheap and mobile-like
- Too much information, it's like the game is in tutorial mode, I don't need the game to tell me what to do. Once again it's lost it's subtlety
DbD has a particular aesthetic which we have grown accustomed to. The new UI feels clunky, forced, unappealing, and soulless.
I understand you are trying to adapt for new players and improve QoL but this forced transition on veteran players is going to create a rift. I suggest as solution, that you add in the ability for players to choose to use the old layout. This might not be as easy as it sounds but there is no way to get "used" to this new UI. It is a downgrade, through and through.
The best post I've seen so far is here
@AChaoticKiller said:
before i start yes i just took screenshots and used MS paint and it's poorly done but really this is all I need to get the point across.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/9V1HVD5CVQ02/screen-focus-new-hub.png
As you can see there are a lot of things on the hud you need to look at, you can ignore # 3, 2, and 5 but the gen icon, survivor states, and your power are really far from each other. this makes it so if you want to check everything or your easily distracted by your hud you have to go all over your screen to check everything. now lets look at the current hud (again just a screenshot from YT)
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/V3NQ6L6Q0PI1/screen-focus-current.png
As you can see there are way less things you need to look at in fact most of the time you only need to look at #3 which has the survivor states, gens, and power all nicely compact into one corner. you rarely have to look at the EGC timer, points, or your perks but the point is all the main things you need to look at are all together. If they really wanted too they could even put in the hook count right next to the power icon to make it even more compact.
My point is the new hud is simply too spread out and is not user friendly, they can fix this in a few ways.
- They provide better locations of these icons, they could even give us multiple options for their placement or even let us put them where we want.
- They let us switch back to using the current hud and as suggested simply put the hook count next to the power or somewhere else. Many of us like the compact placement of the icons it looks good and provides all the info we need to know throughout most of the game.
- they can give us a mix of both the old and new hud's. something like simply replacing the old icons with the new ones, this could also be paired with the 1st suggestion as an option of how you would want the hud to look.
Edit: A lot of people also don't like the new survivor portraits and after seeing them a few times i agree, the current ones are fit the feel of the game better and are also more practical since you just have to glance at them to get info while with the new ones you have to check if they are flashing red which both looks bad and feels lazy. There is also an issue that causes for color blind people since they might not be able to tell at all if the icons are even flashing red. Also as a lot of people said it feels like those portraits belong in a mobile game, they just... don't look right.
Lastly, thank you MandyTalk for making a pinned post about this! I really appreciate you noticing how many posts were made about this.
-
WE DID IT! Mods posted a stickied post about the UI. Thank you
-
The sad part is, players have been giving this same feedback for months. They just ignored the community.
-
It's even worse than learning to ride a bike. Your muscle memory is already defined and now it's just changing all the controls.
-
They can revert the placement of the UI but due to the new coding with the UI it won't be exactly the same? At least that's how I understand it. They could replicate the old UI with the new widget system, which I hope they do. The new UI is horrible, migraine inducing madness.
-
Please mods can we get this pinned? It took serious sifting to find this gem of a summation of what everyone is complaining about? It's amazing that all of this feedback was given months ago.
-
Everyone is asking for this and HAS been saying the new UI is bad but they aren't listening
-
It's sad to see my friend. I feel your pain. The sad part is that none of it makes sense and it feels like we're screaming into the void.
-
I vote No.
- It's too spread out.
- The design lacks the simplicity it had before, the old design was effective and simple.