SpitefulHateful
SpitefulHateful
About
- Username
- SpitefulHateful
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,052
- Last Active
Comments
-
I feel bad for Jason. He deserved better.
-
As a Survivor, I don't t-bag, spam flashlight clicks or noise notifications. If I power Exit Gates, I leave. If I find the hatch, I leave. If I happen to play with a bully squad and see them harrass the Killer in-game, I don't interact with them at all — and call them out in the chat if they keep being toxic towards the Killer. If I happen to play with a hacker — I either dodge the lobby if it's possible or don't cooperate and make sure to report them wherever it's possible.
As a Killer, I avoid 4 people slugging unless it's a sabo squad. If I keep coming across one and the same Survivor who is clearly new to chasing, hiding, and stuff, I leave them alone and switch to others. I also don't reward snitches — I kill both the snitch and the Survivor they have beef with indiscriminately.
-
The main, and valid reason why Killers want to be able to abandon during EGC is because Killers don't want to waste their time. However, standoffs during EGC are often a huge waste. It's often a bitter choice between wasting their time and humiliation. Either try to find activities around the map while you could be queing up for a game or go for a celebratory t-bag and flashlight in the face before the verbal abuse in the endgame chat. Both choices suck because one has players wasting their time pointlessly, other one forces them to interact for toxicity (and subtly blames them for feeling horrible after such matches "It's your fault because you let it get to you").
Not wanting to waste your time in a game you paid for is a good enough reason. Forcing players to choose between being held hostage or face toxicity (because let's be honest, if survivors stand at the exit gates for almost entire EGC timer, they aren't doing it to compliment the Killer) is bad gaming experience — and telling players that they should play another game if they have bad gaming experience in this one is a horrible practice. This is why I'll never say anything bad about Survivor Abandon features and bot implementation — these are good changes and something can be done for Killers as well.
It's not techically possible to let Killers Abandon during EGC? No problem, just give Killers something else to do during EGC. Launch a glyph-seeking quest for extra BPs, let them go to the Void dimension and interact with sprites or carry essence around the altars, come up with some specific tasks that match the Killer's bio — there are many options and any of them better than simply waiting or interacting with players Killers don't feel like interacting with. But what if the Survivors run out of the exit gate and interrupt the Killer's quests? Well, then the game ended and the Killer can go next. Time is not wasted.
-
People suck.
-
@runningguy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4018747#Comment_4018747
no doubt selfish players will get called out on it and get an onslaught of abuse from survivors and killers…as long as you dont care what they think or say then its all good. i lost count how many times i had abuse from others because i casually walked out the gates while 1 was on hook and the other 2 were trying to save. i even had survivors try to body block me at the gates to stop me from leaving lol i just used sprint burst and went past them.
What I learn in my Survivor plays — other Survivors will never be happy, no matter what you do. You try to complete gens, they throw you under the bus for "being a bot". You get off gens to unhook, heal, and be chased — they leave you to die because "so bad, wasn't doing gens the entire game". You hide in a locker once to dodge an aura reading perk you suspect the Killer has — and they start literally noise spamming and clicking to rat you out to the Killer because how dare you be cautious. You'll never be good enough. Oh, also the SFWs who egg their buddies on on the comms to "punish" the SoloQ loser because one of the clique got sacrificed and they need a scapegoat. Lovely.
Once I dropped the altruism and started playing in a way that benefits me and me alone, my Survivor games became much more enjoyable. The goal, after all, is to survive, not to die a people pleaser.
-
@BbQz said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4003802#Comment_4003802
People complain about bad CGI.. again a note on the end product movies like Avatar on release were praised for the CGI and the visuals..
You mention cookie cutter scripts and decrease in writing quality idk what that has to do with AI persay but it's highly possible AI could even help that cause. I'm a mediocre song writer my self (exclusively parody songs that I created for friends and my kids) but AI can really assist once you have the vision at good foundation but can't fill in some of the gaps in ways that sounds and make sense for the theme of your song. This can easily help a bad creator Ok good great. I'm unsure if it can help the people at the peak of the creative world as I'm not one of them so I can't speak on that.
As for skills people worked on for years. Yeah it's sad people in certain industries will no doubt be negitvely affected by this technology. But you really should consider the idea of capability with technology as a mountain. With low technology everyone no matter their capabilities are useful. Mining tilling fields and manual labor. But as technology advances your move closer to the top of the mountain where the peak narrows and less capable people will fall. So many thousands of jobs have been killed by technology over the course of industry revolution to modern day. Gabe Newell said it well instead of reading articles about it and worrying about how it's gonna effect you rush to the races and get involved.
As for the copyright issue. The minute you post something online in a public space expect some one to have learned from it. And by law as long as it's not being used to directly infringe on your IP or branding it is completely legal. Artist have literal been fighting for fair use laws their whole life but the minute it's used against them the script flips completely lol
People complain about bad CGI.. again a note on the end product movies like Avatar on release were praised for the CGI and the visuals..
That's what I said, though? That people notice when a work was done badly and/or carelessly? Also, Avatar is a good example how the quality CGI overshadowed the quality of writing. The movie left its mark, but so very few people can really come up with any memorable quote or any iconic scene. Everybody praises the visuals, but not everyone can recall anything aside from the basic plot.
I'm a mediocre song writer my self (exclusively parody songs that I created for friends and my kids) but AI can really assist once you have the vision at good foundation but can't fill in some of the gaps in ways that sounds and make sense for the theme of your song. This can easily help a bad creator Ok good great. I'm unsure if it can help the people at the peak of the creative world as I'm not one of them so I can't speak on that.
There are many bad creators who gathered quite an audience. There are many good and amazing creators who are only known by small groups. There are people who only make music or art for their friends and family — and to their friends and family they are good creators because this is the side of them they know and it's exclusive experience they get to cherish.
Meanwile, the entire celebrity industry is rooted in promoting and hyping mediocre or downright bad actors or singers. There are singers who need seven separate songwriters to write a simple song for them, there are singers who write and compose their own songs.
AI can't really assist there because creators (regardles of their affinity) grow through their experience and expanding their knowledge. However, using AI doesn't encourage them to do so. Why try different genres, listen and compare works, or practice, when you can have AI do all the work or fill in the gaps so you don't have to? That's also the moment when any creative diversity wilts away because AI usually offers very generic and repetitive options.
As for skills people worked on for years. Yeah it's sad people in certain industries will no doubt be negitvely affected by this technology. But you really should consider the idea of capability with technology as a mountain. With low technology everyone no matter their capabilities are useful. Mining tilling fields and manual labor
People will be negatively affected because higher-ups will decide that AI can replace them (even though it can't) and will destroy their lives and cause great harm by replacing them with AI. AI is a tool. It's not sentient, it's not a great cybermind, it's not even intelligence. It's a bunch of algorithms that lack critical thinking. It only does what it's taught. It can be useful for working with data or tackling information barriers, but it can never have the same level of trust and experience employees have. And especially, it can't make content. Content requires perspective and reflection. Even "so bad it's good" works in media still hold a special place for viewers because the are entertained or intrigued by the train of thought that led to ridiculous or silly scenes. AI doesn't have a train of thought — it mindlessly churns up responses to prompts.
Also, the way corporations and businesses nowadays try to use AI has nothing to do with improving things for people as whole — because CEOs try to use AI as a mean to make them richer (i.e. cut jobs, remove "unnecessary employees", turn AI into an eternal employee that never complains, never takes days off or needs sick leaves, can't say "no" and doesn't need to get paid). It's not about AI improving the life of workers, it's about AI improving the pockets of billionaires who don't give a single damn about the quality of life of ordinary people.
Big studios that want to use AI don't care that people are going to be exposed to soulless slop as long as it allows to fire a couple of departments and put more billions in C-suites' pockets.
Healthcare insurance companies don't care how many people will die because they replaced their entire analytics department with the AI trained to skew results in their favor because the money "saved" by denying insurance are worth it.
Major traveling companies don't care if their AI bot provided false information that caused unnecessary stress and loss for their clients — because it saved them resources on workers and the only real issue is how to get away from litigations and shift accountability.
Currently, we're not in the industrial revolution. We are in the environment where the incentive to learn creative skills (or any skills for that matter) is killed because what's the point?
As for the copyright issue. The minute you post something online in a public space expect some one to have learned from it. And by law as long as it's not being used to directly infringe on your IP or branding it is completely legal. Artist have literal been fighting for fair use laws their whole life but the minute it's used against them the script flips completely lolThere is nothing fair about how AI "learns" from other people's art. It doesn't learn. It copies. It stores it in its datasets, uses it as a template — a template for other people who never were even close to producing an original drawing to earn money from. When an artist learns from someone's art, they incorporate someone's style into their own, but still they use their own ideas and their drawings have their personal touch — they also acknowledge the people who inspired them. This process is healthy and normal because people explore techniques and expand their knowledge — and artists welcome this. They don't mind if more people get inspired from their works and start drawing by learning from them.
AI is like a person who basically directly traces other people's drawings and then boldly presents and monetizes them as their own. This is a spit in the original artist's face and a reason why it's hated in the community. Also, this is not really legal — if the original artists takes the image tracer to the court and provides the proof of plagiarism, they will win their case.
Gabe Newell said it well instead of reading articles about it and worrying about how it's gonna effect you rush to the races and get involved.
So, everybody needs to be an AI developer now, since there is no point in mastering any other job that can be fed to AI? Is that how Gabe sees it?
-
@BbQz said:
In a video game you are playing for the experience. When you watch a movie or see a imagine you do not see or know the ease or difficulty the artist went through to create that you see simply the end result. You as the consumer should be looking forward to the results not the journey to get there. Valid complaints are AI still struggles with certain details which I'm sure will be fixed over time. Just like you wouldn't want your door dash driver to show up 2 hours late on a skate board you shouldn't be cheering for an artist to spends days on an imagine he could generate in 5 mins and touche up in 20. If the results are completely equal.
And before you claim it's killing artists and people will discard the arts because of this change. People still sew knit, they plant and grow food. Almost everything that is a hobby that has grown obsolete by just going to a store and buying something with higher quality that was made in a fraction of the time and priced lower then the labor it would cost you to do your self. Is still practiced by people who just enjoy it.
When you watch a movie or see a imagine you do not see or know the ease or difficulty the artist went through to create that you see simply the end result.
Wrong. There is a reason why people praise good practical effects in movies and call out bad CGI in their reviews. Good practical effects take effort, creativity, and thorougness — which is always noticed. Good acting and writing keep people hooked and invested in a story, while cookiecutter writing and hiring famous celebrities who have a face and are trending for being good-looking (while not being able to act to save their lives) turn a movie into a snore fest. There is a reason why global cinema attendance is dropping — there is nothing worth watching on a big screen and nobody cares to make an effort anymore.
Just like you wouldn't want your door dash driver to show up 2 hours late on a skate board you shouldn't be cheering for an artist to spends days on an imagine he could generate in 5 mins and touche up in 20. If the results are completely equal.
These are two different jobs? A DoorDash driver doesn't cook the food you order, they deliver it — their task is to navigate their movement and manage time efficiently. An artist goes through several stages of creating an image (from trying out concepts to final touches), each of which is necessary for creating an impactful visual.
And before you claim it's killing artists and people will discard the arts because of this change. People still sew knit, they plant and grow food. Almost everything that is a hobby that has grown obsolete by just going to a store and buying something with higher quality that was made in a fraction of the time and priced lower then the labor it would cost you to do your self. Is still practiced by people who just enjoy it.
Except that people spent years and years training, practicing and learning to draw, illustrate, and animate with a very clear and specific goal to work for industries that inspired them. Many of modern artists have been learning and practicing before GenAI was even a thing. And now you suggest they should just accept that the years of their effort, all the time and money they invested in becoming professionals is going to be flushed down the toilet because corporate and business-owning idiots in suits decided they don't need artists anymore because they have an artstyle regurgitating machine that can replicate their work? Do you understand how that sounds?
Not to mention that artists aren't even going to be comfortable with posting their work online for self-promotion or trying to be their own brand — because corporate idiots and AI developers aren't going to bother themselves with such silly concepts as "copyright" and will feed works of other people to AI engine.
-
The entire Casting of Frank Stone was a huge disappoinment. It was clearly meant to expand DbD lore and attract more players to Dead by Daylight, but BHVR failed it.
- Logically, Frank Stone had to be the next original Killer to tie in the CoFS to the main universe and give the new players an incentive. It doesn't matter that Frank was mostly M1 killer in the game — DbD could have expanded his abilities in the Entities realm. There are so many opportunities, especially given that his entire theme that he is a "crafted" Killer, groomed by Augustine as her offering to the Entity.
- We could have had more survivors as interesting as Taurie and Hadie, while expanding the theme of survivors with "mystical" perks and abilities.
- This game could have been a premise for an entire story-based mode in DbD, because the Casting of Frank Stone had a relatively open ending, so giving players an option to choose or find out what happened to the characters by playing as them in a story mode and unlocking bits of story would have been a good opportunity to try out new things.
But instead, BHVR just dropped the game, didn't follow up with introducing Frank to the DbD Killer cast and went back on milking licenses.
-
@UnicornMedal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3998229#Comment_3998229
That's where I always struggle to understand things.
Camping/tunneling/slugging is a gameplay issue. It actively changes how someone is able to be in the trial, to the point that they can be flagging by the anti-go next system and receive a penalty for it (despite how rare that seems to be). Bagging at the gates is a psychological thing. The trial is already over. I'm not against the Killer being able to Abandon in that scenario, but it only affects one's time, not their gameplay.
Now I'm not saying you're doing this, but the two do seem to be conflated a lot and it makes me wonder how you can ever make the game better without harming Killers' ego (not ego as in "big ego" but as in their self-esteem).
Bagging at the gates is a psychological thing. The trial is already over. I'm not against the Killer being able to Abandon in that scenario, but it only affects one's time, not their gameplay.
Isn't the player's time important? Why should they spend their time getting BMed in game when they can just go next?
I've seen many complaints about t-bagging at the gates, specifically, and the answers were always either "suck it up" or "if you don't like it, try not losing". Any suggestions to let Killers opt out were brushed off. So, Killer players follow the latter piece of advice, only to hear "No, you're actually winning the wrong way, shame on you" — which prompts them to respond aggressively and be extremely defensive.
What I mean by that is that players need an incentive to play differently or not to go for the win every game. There is no point in simply appealing to them and asking them to play nice when in-game environment and priorities encourage doing otherwise—and both sides come up with reasons why they shouldn't play nice, based on their own experiences.
For example, a solid part of this incentive is rooted in providing them with options not to interact with sore winners. If a Killer can abandon a trial after all 4 gens pop and go back straight to their lobby, they no longer think about annoying opponents—they are out of sight and out of mind. Instead, they can go to the next game immediately. They will also feel more at ease during the next games—because they will always have this option, so they won't have to deal with toxic moments if they want to and thus, these moments won't linger on their mind, souring their mood and affecting their playstyle. Without this pressure ("win or get mocked"), much more players will be so obsessed with winning.
Another part of encouraging other playstyles would be introducing other rewards or objectives during the game. For instance, integrating tome challenges into the game automatically, so players could unlock charms and lore pieces (potentially related to the character they play at the moment) — in other words, assigning something that players can progress regardless of win or loss.
The community isn't going to fix itself, it can only be limited and incentivized to play differently by the game itself.
-
@DaSonic said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3996740#Comment_3996740
Which is why I explicitly mention that one side is given measures against toxicity, while the other one isn't. I provided an example about how this community treats new players — none of them have the incentive to care about other people's fun in this game. The only way to make sure it happens is to provide both sides with such measures. Until them, no positive engagement between Killers and Survivors can happen — the key is to making sure they interact less.
It is a vicious cycle, meaning the same way it spiraled downwards means it can go upwards. What I am trying to say is, even if they just address one side for now, it will inevitably have an effect on both sides. This is not some competition where people should argue which side has gotten the longer end of the stick. The point is that there is a stick now. Measures like this will inevitably make the game less toxic on both sides.
For example: Killer A tunnels or slugs out Goodie Twoshoes survivor B, who then evolves into his final survivor form: rat survivor B. He will now start teabagging and being annoying however he can to goodie twoshoes Killer C who had nothing to do with the previous interaction. Goodie Twoshoes Killer C will now evolve into HIS final form too and punish survivors who had nothing to do with the previous interaction either.
Now instead, Killer A will not be able to do that, causing Survivor B to stay nice, which then causes Killer C to stay nice. Now I am aware that it is a bit more complicated than that, and might not always play out like that, but even if it does SOMETIMES, then it will have a longlasting effect on game health. Butterfly effect and all. This is just the route BHVR chose. You don't need to give both sides something for both to benefit from it (Besides, Killers now have basekit pop, Basekit bbq and some decent haste, so they DID get something, just not what people might have wanted).And? Once people get used to the game, it's easier for them to win at it. It's not some special talent. Once again, achievements in games aren't doing anything for improvment of physical condition or mental capacity. They don't expand useful knowledge or can be applied in life. They aren't skills.
Saying that people get used to the game, making it easier for the win is just a different way of saying they are more skilled at the game. Also, games absolutely can improve "real life skills", if you don't wanna count how good someone is in a game as a skill. Video games have been proven to improve reaction time and problem solving capabilities for example, which are most definitely skills that can help you in real life, improving your mental capacities.
Esports are just an example of human greed and shalowness, not to mention the exploitation of people. Doesn't serve as a proof of a skill.
You have a bleak outlook on humanity. You need to separate between those that plan those tournaments, and the players that play in those tournaments.
Now instead, Killer A will not be able to do that, causing Survivor B to stay nice, which then causes Killer C to stay nice. Now I am aware that it is a bit more complicated than that, and might not always play out like that, but even if it does SOMETIMES, then it will have a longlasting effect on game health. Butterfly effect and all. This is just the route BHVR chose. You don't need to give both sides something for both to benefit from it (Besides, Killers now have basekit pop, Basekit bbq and some decent haste, so they DID get something, just not what people might have wanted).
Survivor B won't stay nice just because Killer A isn't able to go against the rulebook. Survivor B will lean into the gang mentality and join the group in aggravating and bullying Kiiler A because a) they have an advantage and they need to show they're superior, b) monkey see-monkey do mindset. From my anecdotal standpoint, I have seen more Killers being more protective of Survivors and their game, meanwhile so far I have been the only Survivor to tell the BMers to shut their face up and be normal in the engame chat.
All while Killer A has no way to dip out and continue being a punching bag or an entertainment. Usually places where people pay to get degraded and humiliated have higher age restrictions.
You can't fix the issue by adressing just one side — because it makes this ones side feel like it was in the moral right all along and lean further into "us with them" mentality. You need to address both sides in order to get any tangible effect. In that case, if Killers should care about other Survivrs fun and killing is no longer a priority, they should a) have other objectives that would reward them in a way that would compensate lack of hooks and kills, b) be able to abandon the game if they clearly lost all the gens and don't feel like trying to make a comeback. I'm not even saying about removing endgame chat and limiting player interactions.
Saying that people get used to the game, making it easier for the win is just a different way of saying they are more skilled at the game.
Just because I figure out how to put a jiggsaw puzzle together doesn't mean I got a new skill or became some sort of a champion. I just understood how it works.
Video games have been proven to improve reaction time and problem solving capabilities for example, which are most definitely skills that can help you in real life, improving your mental capacities.
These aren't the same competitive games esport are centered about.
You have a bleak outlook on humanity. You need to separate between those that plan those tournaments, and the players that play in those tournaments.I have a very realistic, not sugar-coated outlook on humanity. Players who play in those tournaments are just grinders used by corporations.
-
@DaSonic said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3996417#Comment_3996417
Here is the contradiction: you say that the Killer is the power role, so it must automatically suck it up and endure everything thrown at them, while acknowledging that they're just people playing with other people. So, just like other people, they become frustrated and lose enjoyment in the game — when they lose and when they are punished both by the game and the winners.
Killers are the power-role in the sense that they control how much of the game the survivors can play. If a Killer so desires (be it by Tunneling or Slugging for example) the Killer can essentially remove one or multiple survivors from the match, or pretty much make them unable to interact in any meaningful way. If survivors could force Killers to be unable to attack or progress the game in their favor, imagine the outcry that would happen. Granted it wouldn't make sense either of course, but the underlying issue here is fun and engagement. Right now (on live servers anyways), Killers can decide whether or not you are allowed to have fun in the match. These changes will take that away from Killers to some extent.
BHVR wants to streamline the game a bit with these changes, because this is probably what they think will cause the highest engagement between survivors and killers. Also, saying the Killer role has to "suck it up" when they could choose to make people unable to play the game for years now is some hilarious hypocrisy. You know "Your fun isn't my responsibility, so enjoy hogging the floor for four minutes until you die.".There is not such thing as skill in gaming. It's not a sport, it's not a craft, it's not a science, it's enterainment that doesn't provide people with any skills or talents they will use in real life. To chastise people that they aren't winning "skillfully" while simultaneously nurturing the culture of winning and dehumanization of those who lose matches is ridiculous.
Claiming that there is no skill in gaming is certainly one of the takes of all time. Take any game for that matter and match someone with 1000 hours versus someone that just started and see who will win the majority of times if not all the time. The overwhelming chances are that people with more time invested and more learned about the game will win. There is a reason e-sports exist with large price pools and giant followings. Only a few people will ever reach the skill to participate in the highest echelons of a game, which is pretty much the exact same as to how real sports like football or basketball operate.
Also, I don't know where you got that one-sided "dehumanization" from. If anything that happens on both sides and feeds into each other in a vicious cycle, like it has been doing for years now.Also, saying the Killer role has to "suck it up" when they could choose to make people unable to play the game for years now is some hilarious hypocrisy. You know "Your fun isn't my responsibility, so enjoy hogging the floor for four minutes until you die.".
This is because:
If anything that happens on both sides and feeds into each other in a vicious cycle, like it has been doing for years now.
Which is why I explicitly mention that one side is given measures against toxicity, while the other one isn't. I provided an example about how this community treats new players — none of them have the incentive to care about other people's fun in this game. The only way to make sure it happens is to provide both sides with such measures. Until them, no positive engagement between Killers and Survivors can happen — the key is to making sure they interact less.
Claiming that there is no skill in gaming is certainly one of the takes of all time. Take any game for that matter and match someone with 1000 hours versus someone that just started and see who will win the majority of times if not all the time
And? Once people get used to the game, it's easier for them to win at it. It's not some special talent. Once again, achievements in games aren't doing anything for improvment of physical condition or mental capacity. They don't expand useful knowledge or can be applied in life. They aren't skills.
The overwhelming chances are that people with more time invested and more learned about the game will win. There is a reason e-sports exist with large price pools and giant followings.
Esports are just an example of human greed and shalowness, not to mention the exploitation of people. Doesn't serve as a proof of a skill.
-
@AcesSpeedo said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3996657#Comment_3996657
survivors get bled out helplessly on the ground…
Anf they can Abandon which is good, the game needed that feature. Am I arguing against it?
-
@AcesSpeedo said:
they should reduce the 10minute afk abandon to 5 minutes. but killer doesnt really need one as the EGC ends the game and the killer can always force survivors out.
And Mori only takes a couple of seconds, yet survivors can tap out — and I fully support it because I personally dislike several Moris (Clown, Trickster, GF), so I appreciate the option not to watch them or having to alt+tab. When Survivors stand at the exit during EGC, they want Killer to come and force them out — because they will be able to t-bag them and mock them one last time without any risk to themselves. Not all Killers want to show up only to get BMed. Giving them an opportunity to abandon game and not deal with all this is logical.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3996417#Comment_3996417
This very forum already had a case where the user's friend tried to get into DbD as a Killer, only to encounter a sweat squad that bullied her relentlessly, mocked her in the endgame chat, telling her to uninstall and calling her a total failure. You think she'd want to go back to this game afterwards? For what? For more abuse? What is her incentive? Is she supposed to have fun with those people?
This would be such a valid point if it ever got brought up outside the context of 'survivors shouldn't get their issues addressed'.
Legit, why's there so many topics about a nebulous 'genrushing' when this is on the table?
I speak only for myself, but I don't recall ever complaining about genrushing specifically.
Yes, gen repair speeds and nerfed regression are annoying, but it was adressable by switching to aura reading perks and perks that help Killer complete every action faster, in addition to using different strategies. I don't blame Survivors for fixing gens fast, I blame them for toxicity and I blame BHVR for leaving fewer and fewer options for low-mobility Killers.
I spoke specifically from the perspective on in-game BMing and abusing of certain features that is addressed for the one side and completely ignored for the other side because "you're the power role, you can handle it". Therefore, I get it why people stressed about having to go though more pressure in a game where the community itself pressures them to either win or be bullied.
-
I enjoy Houndmaster, but she desperately needs some changes. For example, the current "Chase" command mechanic could be replaced with one similar to Knight's — Snug automatically locks onto a chosen Survivor and chases them. If he catches up within the command's duration, he grabs them, but can be unlatched with the help of another Survivor, a pallet stun, or if the Houndmaster doesn't arrive to hit the Survivor in time.
-
@bleep275 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3996355#Comment_3996355
this community is very toxic. I blame it on the wave of hyper-competitive players. Everything is about what is meta, everything has to be an "S-tier", and have their entire emotional well-being placed on winning a match. Its being a slave to ego is how I look at it. They take the laughter and joy out of video games simply because they feel entitled to win. its obnoxious and i disdain this mentality, they're the type of people to leave their shopping cart in the middle of the parking lot because "its not my job, they get paid to do it, not me". I just roll my eyes and continue being happier than them lol.
Anyway, the goal of the killer is not to let survivors have fun. That is the goal of the devs. They have to ensure that both sides are happy and the community is moving into a balanced and mutually enjoyable experience to maintain player base. Sometimes, a consequence of that is one of the sides taking a hit for the overall health of the game. You can still kill, be scary, torment them….but the devs decided (and rightfully so), that enough is enough and survivors are people too. Because the Killer is the "power role" those who main them feel entitled to absolute domination. They are not actually a supernatural killer, they're just a dude in a gaming chair playing with dudes in other gaming chairs. They forget that the game depends on BOTH sides having a fun and playable match. Anti-Tunneling does not rob the killer of the power role or its purpose. If anything it adds more purpose by pushing them from the repetition of "only focus one guy" and makes them focus on map control, chase skill, and decision-making. Survivors still have plenty of ways to lose, they're just hard nerfing the cheesiest and least skillful method of doing that.
I have spent my entire DBD career (since 2017) not ever tunneling and do perfectly fine, above average I would say. Its not the end of the world or DBD, just the end of an unhealthy playstyle.
Because the Killer is the "power role" those who main them feel entitled to absolute domination. They are not actually a supernatural killer, they're just a dude in a gaming chair playing with dudes in other gaming chairs.
Here is the contradiction: you say that the Killer is the power role, so it must automatically suck it up and endure everything thrown at them, while acknowledging that they're just people playing with other people. So, just like other people, they become frustrated and lose enjoyment in the game — when they lose and when they are punished both by the game and the winners. This very forum already had a case where the user's friend tried to get into DbD as a Killer, only to encounter a sweat squad that bullied her relentlessly, mocked her in the endgame chat, telling her to uninstall and calling her a total failure. You think she'd want to go back to this game afterwards? For what? For more abuse? What is her incentive? Is she supposed to have fun with those people?
You can still kill, be scary, torment them
The game doesn't give you points for tormenting or being scary. You get most amount of points and grow your rank for hooks and kills.
Survivors still have plenty of ways to lose, they're just hard nerfing the cheesiest and least skillful method of doing that.
There is not such thing as skill in gaming. It's not a sport, it's not a craft, it's not a science, it's enterainment that doesn't provide people with any skills or talents they will use in real life. To chastise people that they aren't winning "skillfully" while simultaneously nurturing the culture of winning and dehumanization of those who lose matches is ridiculous.
this community is very toxic. I blame it on the wave of hyper-competitive players. Everything is about what is meta, everything has to be an "S-tier", and have their entire emotional well-being placed on winning a match
And this community isn't going to get better, so it's up to devs to fix that. However, they continue to equip one side with more toxicity, while shrugging the concerns of the other side and basically replying with "do better" or "it's your fault for feeling bad when a squad makes your game miserable"
-
@bleep275 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3996255#Comment_3996255
"well I lost yesterday because I played like the system wanted me to"
losing is inevitable. in any competition or game or whatever have you. You can play as optimally and perfectly as possible and still lose in anything. Even without this change…I'm pretty sure no-one in DBD has a 100% victory rate. Devs have said if they notice a steep decline in killer ability, adjustments will be made.
I also think you and I have VASTLY different approaches to this game. You seem analytical and focus on strategy (prolly win alot more than me cuz of it). whereas i play mostly for memes now, i win more than I lose, but winning is just a welcome surprise to my shenanigans. Thats partly why I am excited for this update, because it'll force the repetitive "this is the optimal way to play" sort of gamers to shake things up and take it less seriously (i hope). Its like in chess how everyone plays by the same playbook so when someone comes a long and shakes things up its exciting and fresh again.. You can play as optimally and perfectly as possible and still lose in anything
Wrong. According to this very community, if you lose = you are bad, you aren't worthy of basic respect, you deserve to be smeared in dirt and harassed, and mocked till the winners have enough. You aren't a person, you a barely a human. And if you don't like this treatment, it's on you because git gud.
This is the mentality people come to this game, this is the mentality they learn and this is the mentality BHVR encourages.
If the main goal of Killers is no longer to kill but to let Survivors have fun, they should have shifted the objective of the game and introduced the alternative quests for Killers to fulfill, instead of providing one side with all the options to opt out or get a second chance, while telling the other side that it's basically their fault for trying to play as a Killer in the first place.
-
@Leon_van_Straken said:
But if the Killer is waiting for one Survivor to knock him down all the time, the rest of the Team can pick themself up or am I wrong here?
Likewise you can´t abandon when other Survivors are working with the killer only when he slugs them too.
So abandon should be there to minimize the toxicity of humping, Tbagging is okay? Or should the killer be allowed to abandon when the Exit Gates are open?I actually believe that the Killer should be allowed to abandon the game when the Exit Gates are open. Just instantly disconnect and go straight to the Killer lobby. I'm not exaggerating, such an option will be huge for the game's actual because a) if Killer is having a bad day and happened across a bully squad, they aren't made guilty for not enduring their mockery, b) it discourages exit gate BM because Killer no longer has to be present for this, c) it will encourage Killers to keep playing and even make them more at peace with not winning of the time because they no longer have to deal with abuse.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3995367#Comment_3995367
Don't people constantly tell survivors to 'git gud' too?
"Git gud" is the only word and argument this community knows, it's not news. Once again, if people love this patch simply because they love the idea of abusing their opponents, they should just say so. Not pretend like they care about the health of the game.
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3994617#Comment_3994617
Absolutely not. The goal of a multiplayer game doesn't exist. It's multiple. One of them is allowing a fun experience for a group of people. If all you can think of is egoing, then I think you might be taking this game, or any game, too seriously.
It's not what all I can think of. It's all I saw in multiplayer games with a compeititve element in it.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3995270#Comment_3995270
But this video doesn't prove jack, though, does it?
Besides, if Otz can do it, why couldn't anyone else?
Because playing DbD is literally Otz's job? Do you really expect anyone else to grind their lives away?
-
@HaliAndEx said:
No, mainly because having 5 gens done doesn't mean you lost as killer.
It pretty much does.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3994590#Comment_3994590
It's been 3 years of these same people having literally zero empathy for anyone except themselves in this game.
Similar massive changes over the years have been met with "git gud", "you're refusing to adapt", "just quit if you don't like it", or "you're just entitled".
Mostly from the same group of people currently melting down over this patch that now will affect then and their gameplay instead.
This is what the same people have been hearing from their opponents in the game, each time they won. And they see no incentive not to repeat it back to them—also, this community and its "values" don't give any incentive as well. Nobody in DbD (and in our world) cares for anyone except themselves, it's not a secret. But, if it's all about the revenge, people should just say so instead of pretending they support fairness.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3994585#Comment_3994585
Except that the way you describe how Killers want to play is simply tunneling someone out and then just play with the other Survivors to go for multiple chases, because they just cannot lose anymore. If you tunnel someone out you can have a 12 Hook-game risk-free basically.
Sure, good to stroke your ego. But not really healthy.
Stroking one's ego is the only goal of multiplayer games.
-
Maybe they would be less upset if this community didn't treat people without uninterrupted winstreaks as subhuman trash? Just a thought.
-
Of course they don't. Not all devs even have the game installed.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3993080#Comment_3993080
Abuse is when a mechanic meant to create a fairer experience is exploitable for gaining an unfair advantage.So you are giving two conditions to the use of abuse:
Created for a fairer experience - this gets back to my point on BHVR's intent
Unfair advantage - so we're in subjective territory basically meaning too strong
I named examples when anti-tunnel perks were used for more agressive play.What is unfair about aggressive play?
The planned changes allow for more exploits, especially for Killers that no longer bring BHVR moneyI like a good conspiracy theory into their motives, but people are talking about playing only Nurse and Blight. Are these hug cash cows for BHVR at this point?
What is unfair about aggressive play?
Unfair advantage - so we're in subjective territory basically meaning too strong
When 4 play agressively against 1 and stack perks to considerably increase their advantage and/or to harass them, it doesn't sound fair.
I like a good conspiracy theory into their motives, but people are talking about playing only Nurse and Blight. Are these hug cash cows for BHVR at this point?That's the point, though? There are many different Killers available, but Nurse and Blight remain nearly only ones strong enough to keep up with the changes and make up for the pressure. Other Killers with interesting mechanics are not in a good spot. Trapper, despite being the iconic Killer, literally the "face" of DbD is a meme right now, literally a bully bait. Onryio? Reworked into Oblivion. Pinhead? Pretty much stashed away because no longer money. Unknown? Gutted. The list goes on.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992873#Comment_3992873
So abuse is when something is used against BHVR's intentions, but also when they want something in but you don't think its good for the game.
Your definition of abuse seems to equate to 'personally dislike'.
BHVR didn't see the Streetwise bug as an exploitThey didn't see that it merited the kill switch. They were wrong and changed course.
So abuse is when something is used against BHVR's intentions, but also when they want something in but you don't think its good for the game.
Your definition of abuse seems to equate to 'personally dislike'.
Abuse is when a mechanic meant to create a fairer experience is exploitable for gaining an unfair advantage. I named examples when anti-tunnel perks were used for more agressive play. I have also plenty of examples for sabo squad whose only mission is to deny hooks and make the trial miserable. The planned changes allow for more exploits, especially for Killers that no longer bring BHVR money (i.e. forgotten and ignored) and lack the mobility to keep with gen repair speed (and players who don't grind DbD like they get paid for it).
I personally dislike that BHVR ignores the root problem and tries to appease one side only, if anything. But my thoughts on BHVR's competence aren't pleasant in general.
-
@BreadLord said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992865#Comment_3992865
you dont understand. i shouldnt have to ignore someone in a trap as trapper or someone condemned
No you see, Survivors can make mistakes and win. As a Killer, you either learn Blight, or get tbagged.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992855#Comment_3992855
but the devs didn't calculate that survivors with DS are going to bodyblock and throw themselves at the KillerTwo points:
1: Based on what didn't they calculate that? They literally put a tracker into the game called 'protection hit', they're well aware that survivors protect each other.
2: If they viewed it as abuse they could have changed it. It's no secret that it can occur.
If it's an M1 killer without any mobility, these strong hooks won't do much.So when talking about abuse on the survivor side we take the most extreme example (a coordinated SWF), but when talking about the killer side we take the most extreme example in the other direction (an M1 killer without mobility).
1: Based on what didn't they calculate that? They literally put a tracker into the game called 'protection hit', they're well aware that survivors protect each other.
The list of BHVR's problems with long-term decision-making is quite long. Remind me, when Mathieu Cote said that flashlighrs weren't a problem, what was he basing his statement on?
2: If they viewed it as abuse they could have changed it. It's no secret that it can occur.
BHVR didn't see the Streetwise bug as an exploit — and recommended playing another game to players, who complained about having bad experience. Does it sound like competence?
So when talking about abuse on the survivor side we take the most extreme example (a coordinated SWF), but when talking about the killer side we take the most extreme example in the other direction (an M1 killer without mobility).A coordinated SWF isn't an extreme example, it's very common (voice comms make a lot of difference), and M1 killers aren't rare as well — not all people want to master Nurse.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992698#Comment_3992698
Like they abuse DS and other anti-tunneling perks? Like they abuse anti-slugging perks and sabo builds?Question about abuse.
To help killers deal with the unhookable builds, BHVR added in extra hooks. Some of those are in strong and easy to defend positions.
When a killer hooks someone on them who doesn't have a wiggle off build, are they abusing the hooks? Because they are using them for an unintended purpose after all.
You're comparing apples and oranges.
DS and other anti-tunnel was designed to prevent Killers from tunneling, but the devs didn't calculate that survivors with DS are going to bodyblock and throw themselves at the Killer to engage them into chase and prevent them from going after other survivors.
An anti-camp mechanic and the built-in BT now make sure that the Killer can't really defend a strong hook and there is plenty of room for survivors to dive in for the rescue. If it's an M1 killer without any mobility, these strong hooks won't do much.
-
You gonna get punished for playing as Trapper in the first place.
-
It's not the "4K mindset", it's the "must win to be considered a human being" mindset—and it's the very old issue of the gaming community. Winners are gods, they get all the respect, their opinion matters, their word is hear, they get praise and rewards and expect adoration. Losers are barely people in the gamers' eyes—their only purpose is to be humiliated, ridiculed, and dragged through the dirt, not to mention harassed beyond the game. Their time gets wasted, they don't get to argue, they don't even deserve to use some measures against the abuse—just eat the dirt, leave no crumbs, smile and nod because you lost, so you don't deserve to be treated well.
No matter what anyone says, the "just be chill" excused don't work in multiplayer game, DBD in particular:
New to the game? — not my problem, baby, ur trash, ez, delete the game
Just trying a fun build? — loser, trash, dog, bark for us, lmao
Not trying to win — lmao you're just used to being a loser, hahah, we're so good
The worst part? At the end of the day, everyone blames those who find themselves at the receiving end for reacting instead of acknowledging that BMing options should be taken away. So, until this "winning is everything" mindset goes away, this issue will remain.
-
Twins who?
-
@TimberGoingDown said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992257#Comment_3992257
Then this balance patch is even worse. If you just don't consider the S tiers into the discussion, then this patch is even more punishing of mid tier killers just playing the game normally.
At tjat point, BHVR should just remove all the Killers except from Nurse and Blight.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992764#Comment_3992764
Really just proving OP's point here.
Like I said, I have been right many times before. OP's blind faith in BHVR is their own problem.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992759#Comment_3992759
You're not helping your case of 'devs should listen to the forums' here, bud.
I'm making fun of people who enjoy BHVR disrespecting them and exploiting them for money.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992753#Comment_3992753
If they're not listening to feedback then, they're not listening now, so what difference does it make to you?
I gave up on this game long ago, I'm merely watching it die while enjoying all the Survivor hand-holding. It's funny to watch people defend devs each time they screw up though
-
Yes. Because none of the issues detected in the last PTB were fixed, which shows that BHVR pays no attention to feedback. BHVR is stacking a Jenga tower of bugs, issues, and problems, and keeps adding more on top—this approach is not changing, but everybody expects a miracle.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992737#Comment_3992737
Even if the buff is 10%, it's still a solid way to secure a win, which is worth the sacrifice.
Are you serious? You'd rather do the remaining gens in a 1v3 with +10% repair speed, than in a 4v1?
Because I'm pretty sure all previous discussion about anti-tunnel points towards no killers agreeing with you.
So, if the Killer kills one survivor early, giving a free speed boost, and then kills another survivor, the rest gets gen speed + renders all regression/blocking perks useless.
Nope, also wrong. You can kill all survivors without triggering this, it's a separate item.
When I play as a Survivor, I don't rely on other Survivors in the first place and choose my perks accordingly - funny fact, my trials became must easier that way. I got iri rank and had mutliple escapes without any stress or care, so I don't have to worry about 4v1 or 3v1. The game literally gives all the assistance you need, as a Survivor.
Nope, also wrong. You can kill all survivors without triggering this, it's a separate item.- If the Survivor that was last hooked is Sacrificed or Killed, generators cannot be regressed or blocked.
How is Killer supposed not to trigger this? Not hook?
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992729#Comment_3992729
But your only feedback is 'the last patches didn't work so just give up and stop trying'.
And your feedback is "let's blindly trust the devs, they are clearly competent and know what they're doing, also they totally weren't documented ignoring and dismissing solid advice on a recent live stream".
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992710#Comment_3992710
Sacrificng one player for 3-person escape has never been an issue for survivors, not in SoloQ, not in SWF.
This is a truism.
'It's worth doing, if it's worth doing' is not an argument.
Throwing a survivor under the bus means ditching someone who can do gens, who can heal, who can make a save, who can loop the killer.
So this sacrifice requires the repair speed boost to outweigh all that survivor potential. I ask you to value it and your answer is
'If it's high enough, it's high enough'
inability to regress and block gens after killing one survivor
Doesn't happen for an early kill, only for killing the most recent hook. You control this as killer.
Also, you base your opinion on a bias that survivors are that tight-knit "we're in this together" group that will go through hell and back to rescue everyone, while that's rarely the case.
I'm not doing anything of the sort. You mentioned survivors 'abusing' this, but are unwilling to think about what the repair speed boost would need to be in order for this early, free kill to be outweighed.
Because if it's something like 10%, it's laughable to think that any killer would be meaningfully hindered by a survivor intentionally saving them chases and setting them up for a snowball for a joke of a speed boost!
I'm not doing anything of the sort. You mentioned survivors 'abusing' this, but are unwilling to think about what the repair speed boost would need to be in order for this early, free kill to be outweighed.
Survivors scattered across gens can complete two gens at once in a single chase (and it's without any gen speed perks and tools), while gen regression perks have been rendered useless. Survivors with perks and tools can do even more. Even if the buff is 10%, it's still a solid way to secure a win, which is worth the sacrifice. Who cares ditching just one Survivor if it secures an easy escape, which mean they won't need extra hands for hooking, healing, etc.?
Survivors have more tools to control the game, meanwhile only A-tier Killers like Nurse and Blight can keep up.
Doesn't happen for an early kill, only for killing the most recent hook. You control this as killer.
So, if the Killer kills one survivor early, giving a free speed boost, and then kills another survivor, the rest gets gen speed + renders all regression/blocking perks useless. So what, don't kill survivors untill they fix all the gens and t-bag at the exit gate?
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992724#Comment_3992724
Then you have no useful feedback and you should not be listened to. Exactly as OP says.
The latest BHVR's failures state otherwise, but keep lying to yourself.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992721#Comment_3992721
No, because you just throw a truism at it.
'If it's worth doing, it's worth doing'
Which firstly is a nonsense answer and secondly is very clearly NOT an answer to the question posed, but rather an attempt to pre-empt what follows.
The truth is that you're exactly what OP is talking about. You don't WANT this update to succeed and you're willing to avoid all thought and consideration of it in order to stop it happening.
Your feedback is based specifically off of not thinking about it.
I know this update won't succeed, just like I knew that BHVR parasitizes on licenses and nerfs them into ground as soon as they no longer bring money (while original chapters get massively neglected and are released in a half-baked state); just like I knew that BHVR cares about milking players for cash more than it cares about giving positive experience; just like I knew that BHVR needs to be slapped with its own bugs and exploits to stop wiggling its way out of acknowledging it. I was right every time, no matter how much people argued and defended the devs. Right now, BHVR clearly prioritizes their Sable skin buyers over anything else - their funeral.
Also, leave your replies in the according thread.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992719#Comment_3992719
No, you keep dodging it. A question of whether something is worthwhile to do can't be answered with 'it just is'.
I even expanded my last reply to make it as clear as possible to you. Just because you don't like what I have to say doesn't mean I'm dodging.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992717#Comment_3992717
Got the threads mixed up.
What repair speed bonus would offset a dead survivor?
I answered your question twice in that thread.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992715#Comment_3992715
Answer the question.
What kind of question did you ask me in this thread?
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992712#Comment_3992712
Went like a lead balloon.
Answer the question.
So, you expect to trust BHVR with applying changes to PTB after the disastrous Walking Dead PTB?
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992706#Comment_3992706
If you're too scared to even think about this update, let others do the talking.
If you can't answer the question, at least have the decency to admit you have no idea what this patch will be like.
Answer the question.
How did the Walking Dead PTB go through?
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3992704#Comment_3992704
No you didn't, you dodged it.
'Players will sacrifice one to get the 3e if they can' is not an answer to the question of IF they can.
I didn't dodge anything. Sacrificng one player for 3-person escape has never been an issue for survivors, not in SoloQ, not in SWF. Also, the amount of times I saw SWFs just throw the SoloQ survivor under the bus because they didn't meet their performance standards and thus, deserve to be sacrificed, tells me that this tendency will increase after the changes.
UPD: If it's that hard for you to understand - generators already take seconds to repair, while regressing at much slower rate. There is an infinte amount of perks + tools that allow to accelerate this process even if there is only one survivor sitting on the gen. A gen repair boost + inability to regress and block gens after killing one survivor is a huge buff for the rest of the group and it definitely offsets one survivor dying. Also, you base your opinion on a bias that survivors are that tight-knit "we're in this together" group that will go through hell and back to rescue everyone, while that's rarely the case.