StarLost
StarLost
About
- Username
- StarLost
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@TangledNoodles said:
For me it's not about how strong the killer is, I couldn't care less about that. But playing against legion makes me wanna eat glass. It's all run, mend, run, mend. It's such stale gameplay and tbh if I was playing the legion I wouldn't think that it's fun gameplay unless I was trolling. I would much rather face ANY other killer than legion tbh.
I'd rather face a Legion than a basement Bubba, a Trickster, Twins (holy crap am I seeing a lot of this killer, and they always hard slug at 5 gens), Knockout killers, AFK Popper Pig, Nurse, Blight and Huntress.
At least Legion isn't going to facecamp.
-
@Thusly_Boned said:
In the games I have played against Legion the past couple days, the "split up" counterplay has worked as it always has. They seem marginally stronger, and got a few more hits than I expected, but seemed fundamentally the same. But still not particularly good.
Maybe I have just gone up against the wrong ones.
I really hope they don't nerf them.
That's the thing.
If people huddle together right from the start, Legion can reap through them.
If people split up (like...they should be doing anyway), Legion is pretty simple and you can loop them almost forever unless you're in a huge deadzone.
-
@Sluzzy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2928637#Comment_2928637
Against a perfect 4 man?
In a match of 5 average players, the Legion always wins. That's not really fair. Legion is way too effective for how easy he is to play.
No counterplay to his speed, no counterplay to his instinct. Everyone is always injured because of "no counterplay"
I've been playing survivor for...maybe 60 hours now.
I've faced 5 Legions since the buff. I beat 3 of them and lost twice.
This strikes me as a 'you' problem - if I can handle them as a terrible survivor, there's no reason you shouldn't be able to.
-
@Sluzzy said:
The mere fact Otz had to make this video is very telling that something is horribly wrong with Legion. The extreme majority is not able to play against him as he breaks the game.
Who honestly thought that pressing M2 for guaranteed wins is a good idea and fair for the other side?
BHVR hasn't ever learned from their mistakes.
Don't worry, I'm for certain survivors will be nerfed again before fixing Legion.
No, that's what's called a 'Kafkatrap'.
The Legion are 'B' tier, at best.
-
@OpenX said:
Too strong for how easy they are to play imo. And some of the addons are just dumb and remove all counterplay. Also I don't like being so heavily punished for my team's mistakes.
I much prefer a killer like Ghostface where if I get exposed its my own fault and not because Joe-Schmoe got stabbed 40m away and now the legion knows my position.
Also the gameplay is such a slog. Mend, mend, mend, can't save because I'm injured, thanatophobia so im holding M1 for an eternity no matter what, etc etc.
Avoiding survivor until they get nerfed or the craze dies down
Thing is - yes, most people would rather face Ghostface now than Legion, because Ghostface is much easier to beat, as his 'buffs' came out at a wash. Legion requires a bit of foresight.
It's the same as people preferring to face Pig as opposed to Nurse, or Sadako as opposed to Spirit.
-
@Nos37 said:
If you don't have the Green Glyph challenge active, STOP interacting with other players green glyphs!
I don't think you can see them unless you have the challenge.
Plus, they're worth a decent amount of BP.
-
The more I play Sadako, the more I honestly prefer Pig.
-
@dollidahlia said:
The addons are great an all but this killer can’t shine because he has no anti-loop and is HEAVILY countered by spine chill and SWF.
but I guess I have to give it 10000000 years before I can say something because “He just got reworked.”
Shrug. Well I guess we'd better learn to appreciate it, like the Pig and Myers 'reworks', because chances are that's all the love he's getting until 2028.
-
@Steel_Eyed said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2926003#Comment_2926003
The scripts, that cheaters use, alter the game engine through macros. So locking the engine prevents many of those cheat software engines to have trouble operating.
Maybe you don’t know what you’re talking about but this thread is asking for the loophole to come back, indirectly.
Get it now?
It was more that you seemed to be accusing the OP of cheating.
-
@brokedownpalace said:
Is he really that unpopular? I've seen quite a few Legions but they were never rare to begin with. I honestly saw more GF before this buff lol. I've probably only played like 25 matches since the update so far but still
I've seen one (and a tsunami of Legions).
I find the biggest issue with him to be how hard Spine Chill counters him.
-
@ezmindgames said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2926420#Comment_2926420
Played 4 different rounds, lost all of them with barely any gens done, im not sure if the game expects me to play 50 rounds of unfair games for decent matchmaking
Do 10, that seems to be the number to get out of 'placement', at least from what I've found.
Also noticed something odd - I'll go on a massive losing streak one night, then the next day all my games are easy. I wonder if MMR updates at a specific time of day...
-
@Tostapane said:
be careful people, i just discover 2 bugs while doing some kyf with a friend (i asked his help cause something wrong occurred while doing a normal match that i did before)...
1 RANCOR is bugged - we tried with different killers and maps (i discovered it in a normal match cause i had a daily as billy to mori someone) but the outcome is the same: the survivor will see the killer's aura as intended, but he won't be exposed and it won't apper the mori prompt on the killer
2 PINHEAD is bugged - or to be precise his chainhunt: once it starts, nothing will happen, not a single chain will spawn
Going to add this one, although I'm not sure what it is yet.
- A survivor was slugged. We were unable to heal them. The killer was able to pick them up, but not hook them.
-
@Marigoria said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925537#Comment_2925537
Being an academic is like saying you have a gender studies degree. You're still not a doctor.
We're talking on the internet, while real life bills against transgender rights are being purposed by real life governments. Transgender rights are not just some quirky internet thing.
My personal experience while surrounded by other people who are also transgender is not anecdotal evidence.
And no, the predator argument isnt different. Gay people used to be accused of faking being gay just to go to bathrooms and to prey on other people. Same thing is happening now with transgender people and that also includes prison/jail.
You are right, this is not a left vs right issue, this is a people who want rights vs people who don't want others to have rights. And from your talking points, which come from a conservative view, I'm not too inclined to assume you are pro the former.
It can be seen as a storm in a teacup when the bills don't affect you in any way yes.
Okay, in brief:
- I'm not saying I'm a doctor. But I am saying that I do have qualifications in psychology and have a pretty robust understanding of the domain.
- Yes, we're talking on the internet, on a videogame forum - which is why I didn't want to get into current IRL controversies like the 'DSG' bill. I'm happy to argue that one if you want, but let's do it in Off Topic or something, or maybe a different forum completely. We're already OT, and it's going to be a discussion that might (see: almost certainly will) upset people, and it's not one that I can really have while treading on eggshells.
- Anything that starts with 'my personal experiences' is anecdotal evidence. That's...what it means. Personal experiential evidence rather than something data based.
- ...What? No, that was never the 'predators' argument (and I'm pretty sure that there has never been a 'gay bathroom' debate either). The original one was more a really nasty attempt to paint homosexuals as pederasts. The current one is completely different and comes down to pragmatism.
- No, this isn't a 'rights' thing either. It's about accommodations and the nature of identity, probably best parsed as 'balancing accommodating transgender people within society against pragmatic concerns about fairness and bad actors'. Rights don't really come into it, because 'Rights' are a legalistic, generally constitutional issue rather than a social one.
And again, I'm happy to continue this one (later) but let's move it somewhere else - I'm sure the mods are already giving this thread the hairy eyeball.
-
@Marigoria said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925474#Comment_2925474
It's not at large, no, and which makes me think why did you not show sources of transgender people saying the exact opposite of the ones you linked?
I'm not sure if you are cisgender or not, but I'm going to assume you are, so I'm sure you are not used to hanging out with transgender people, specially transgender circles in real life outside of the internet, so I'm sure you'd easily see things that get loud because it's what conservatives like to boost up, for their own narrative about transgender people. They did the same with gay people before, this is just recycled talking points because they feel like gay people are accepted enough that their bigotry just won't slid so easily anymore, so they decided to go to the next marginalized group.
Being part of trans groups irl, knowing what most trans people think, is not anecdotal evidence. I'm sure me, as a transgender person, would know way more about transgender issues than someone who is not, not only by my personal experiences, but by the people that I know that have a similar life path as me.
You disagree with the DSM-5, which brings again that neither you or I are doctors. DSM-5 is made by doctors, and I'd rather side with science on this one. Again, something that conservatives seem to not be big fans of.
The predator argument was also used on gay people in the past, and now is being used against trans people. If you are not aware, please do a bit of research about current bills being purposed by republicans on the topic, I'm sure there are a lot of them, and you'll notice that is once again, mostly made of fear mongering.
I could, naturally. Which is why I didn't say 'at large' or 'the majority', because I don't think either of us could prove that one either way :)
We are talking about the internet here - as we are on a videogame forum. But I am also a former academic (and am married to a current academic) - and there is plenty of this discourse at universities too.
And yes - what you just said is the literal definition of anecdotal evidence. 'My personal experiences, therefore x'. Which is fine, because there isn't really that much actual data on this one. But your anecdotal evidence is still anecdotal evidence, much like mine. Although you seem to be coming from more of a 'man on the street' approach, while mine is mostly online and in academic circles.
It's not that I disagree with the DSM 5, it's that the DSM 5 is quite complicated as, unlike previous editions, the DSM 5 is designed to be constantly changing.
While I'm not a practicing psychologist, that is the area where my qualifications lie (well, criminology and clinical psychology, I'm an educator by trade) - and I can tell you that 'psychology' and 'science' are not always compatible domains. It really depends whether you go for more of a Jungian or Freudian deconstructivist/psychoanalytic approach, or something a bit more pragmatic like Klein. But again, a different discussion - I can talk psych literally all day, but we've already gone OT.
Regarding the predator thing, it's a bit different as one came from an attempt to demonize homosexuals and the other is a pragmatic concern about bad actors taking advantage based on the concessions being asked for.
Let's not make this into a left versus right thing, because this isn't a partisan issue. By 'current bill', I'm assuming you're talking about the DSG storm in a teacup?
EDIT: I should probably go and be productive for a while, so going to end this here (it's also going really off topic now). If you want to continue this one, maybe let's move to the Off Topic board later today.
-
@White_Owl said:
According to 90% of fanarts, he has always been gay.
That's true of most things on the internet though XD.
@deKlaw_04 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2924559#Comment_2924559
If they changed Superman then I would be pissed
DC (and now Marvel) have found an absolutely ingenious way to get around this via their 'multiverse' concepts. Now you can have the 'diverse' characters and 'classic' characters at the same time, and both everyone and no-one is satisfied.
-
@Marigoria said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925425#Comment_2925425
No, woman and man have not been used in a biological sense. When you go to the doctor it says F or M, not W or M.
Again, anecdotal evidence. A loud minority is not evidence of transgender people at large thinking that.
And dysphoria is not a contentious term. It has a section on the DSM-5, I'm sure doctors have more expertise on the topic than both of us, or anyone else who is not in the field for that matter.
No, there is no misunderstanding about the predator argument. What the OP was implying was that transgender women go to women prisons to impregnate women.
Yes, they have. Because it's only recently that we've started separating out the social aspects of gender identity from the biological aspects in any sort of formal way. Even medical professionals have, until recently, used man/woman as a shorthand for male/female.
I never said 'at large'. But this does illustrate what I was alluding to - modern progressive activist bases lack orthodoxy, and will thus often believe different, at times contradictory things. It's why a lot of companies are just staying out of it - because a base without orthodoxy is impossible to please, as satisfying one part of the base will tick off another part. Just look at the stuff around Batwoman or Cyberpunk for some good examples.
That said - you saying 'loud minority' is just as anecdotal :) I don't think anyone has done a survey or poll here.
Yes, dysphoria is absolutely a contentious term, with some activists likening including it as a disorder to previous DSMs including homosexuality as a disorder. Here's a good example of the arguments being presented (it also contains some links to other articles on the topic).
It does more harm than good.I completely disagree with it - but I do understand the arguments. And the DSM 5 is...oh man, that's another discussion for another time.
I'm not sure what argument the OP was making, I'm just trying to explain the general thrust of the 'predator' argument because it's so frequently strawmanned as 'trans people are predators'.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925408#Comment_2925408
They have both of those 🕳️👩🏻🦯
Derp, this is me trying to do several things at once XD. Well spotted!
@FragmentalMan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925408#Comment_2925408
OH lol i didnt realize what i said could be misread. i have those dlc, those are the ones i already own and use! you're totally right tho but yeha i already have those and the ones i listed are ones i have already.
No, that was totally my bad.
If you're looking for killer DLC:
The Artist - amazing killer, incredible perks. Pain Resonance is just so, so good and Pentimento synergizes well with any hex build.
The Cenobite - Plaything is one of the most fun perks in the game. He's fun too, if a little tricky.
The Hag - Ruin and Devour will never not be good, plus she's amazing.
-
@Marigoria said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925366#Comment_2925366
You lost me at "Biological sex is a social construct". No trans person thinks that, otherwise we would not transition medically in the first place. We are well aware of biological sex and it's differences, that's where our dysphoria comes from. A small loud minority twitter saying biological sex is socially constructed, is not a general sentiment, far from it.
There is a lot of phobic in calling a trans woman a man, which was exactly what that person did. Like I mentioned in my post, man and woman are not biological terms, they are identities, and those yes, are socially constructed. And keep it in mind that something being social constructed doesn't mean they don't exist. Languages are socially constructed and they do exist. Female and male are biological.
They also implied with their post that trans women want to go to women prisons to make other women pregnant, which implies that trans people are predators.
Yes, trans people (or rather activists) absolutely think that. I can link you to dozens of articles and videos on the topic.
I recently tweeted, as an aside, that biological sex is a social construct, and the backlash and attacks were swift, incredulous and heavily reliant upon very basic biology. There is a common perce…What do people, including bioscientists, mean when we say “sex is a social construct?” That’s weird, right? Sex is about biology, isn’t it? Sometimes people hear “soci…From the Supreme Court to J.K. Rowling, the topic of biological sex is seemingly everywhere. But biological sex is fraught with complexity, and there’s no one parameter that makes a person biologically male or female.“Trans women are women, but they’re still biologically male.” If you’ve thought or said this, this explanation will give you a much better understanding of sex and gender.It generally comes down to post-modern confusion, in that just because we assign words to a thing doesn't mean that it lacks objective existence independent of these words.
Even the term 'dysphoria' is contentious now, as per the 'my identity is NOT a disorder!' discourse.
The problem is that 'man' and 'woman' have been classically used to refer to both biological and social identities - creating confusion when people separate them out.
A lot of people misunderstand the 'predators' argument too. It's not a matter of 'trans people are predators' and more along the lines of 'all people are potential predators, and thus we have to ensure that bad actors can't abuse the accommodations we make for trans people'.
-
@FragmentalMan said:
hiiiii <3 i plan on buying some new dlc soon, i play on ps4 and have the following dlc: halloween, resident evil, silent hill, saw, ghostface, evil dead, stranger things and hour of the witch! i was wondering from people who own other ones what killers they like to play as and against from the other dlc. note: i am not going to buy the one with plauge i cannot play against her without my emetophobia acting up but everything else is free reign for me.
From the killer perspective, assuming you can only pick one:
Resident Evil gives you a fun killer and...okay perks. I'd go with that or Ghostface (same reason).
From a survivor perspective:
Hour of the Witch. CoH and SS are really good perks.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925349#Comment_2925349
No way did you just bring out the "I have gay friends so I can't be homophobic" line like?????
Eh...this is a line of argument that I've never liked.
Someone bigoted against 'x' having 'x' friends strikes me as, at least...very odd and this inevitably turns into a Kafkatrap or a PAN trap.
-
@Marigoria said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925329#Comment_2925329
I'm trans, and saying a trans woman has a man body is transphobic. If we want to focus on biologically, there is no woman or man, there is male and female, and I speak for myself, but I'm totally aware of my biology. When I go to the doctor as a trans man, I'm aware that I'm biologically female, but I am not "woman bodied". Calling a trans woman a man is not biologically accurate, since again, it's not based on biology.
Implying trans women being put in women prisons will lead to high rises of pregnancy is statistically incorrect and made with anecdotal evidence.
Okay, please take this as charitably as possible - this topic is a sodding minefield even on open forums, but I'll see if I can explain the other side of the argument here (while trying to tread...carefully).
- This comes down to semantic confusion due to the way we've classically used these terms.
- 'Male and female' versus 'man and woman'...a lot of people use these terms interchangeably, where they refer to both biology and identity. When it comes to trans stuff, these two get separated out - with male and female being biological descriptors and man and women being social descriptors.
- The problem arises where people start doing both at the same time (where in one context these meanings are separated and in another they are synonymous), and I think this is where you're making your mistake.
- Biologically, there is very clearly 'male' and 'female', we can see this at a chromosomal and neurochemical level. Whether chromosomal disorders constitute their own category...that's a very complicated and very different discussion.
- It's completely fine to say 'I identify as x', but it's a bit different to say 'I am x at a biological level'. 'Biological sex is a social construct' is fringe thinking even within progressive circles.
- There is nothing 'phobic' about separating these things out. You can ask people to respect your identity, but you cannot force them to ignore biology - and if you do, you start getting into very weird Veronica Ivy territory.
When we get down to sports, prisons, dating and the like, it gets even more complicated, and this is a contentious topic within even the most progressive circles, with it coming down to post-modernist thinking (there is no such thing as objective biological reality, therefore biology is a social construct and can be changed at will) and more pragmatic thinking.
I'm not saying that either side is completely right or wrong, but there is absolutely multiple sides to this issue and labelling the other sides as 'transphobic' isn't useful.
-
@AnneBonny said:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/DT03QCVK34EM/screenshot-28174-29.png
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925304#Comment_2925304
oh hey you're the lady who spewed transphobic rhetoric on the thread where you were complaining about david being gay
trans women generally do worse in women's sports than cis women and go ######### yourself for calling me and people like me "physically men"
I'd be wary labelling this stuff as 'transphobic', as the biological reality of transgenderism is a contentious topic even within progressive circles.
If you disagree - then disagree. Put your reasoning into text and post it, then be ready to defend it.
Calling people names is counterproductive.
-
@Deathstroke said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2923809#Comment_2923809
I think game should not be changed that you have to hook everyone twice but make it worth it other than feeling you are good person. I think gens speed could go faster if there is 3 alive and still 3-4 gens left (like 10-15s faster). But then game should be slower when there is 4 survivors alive so maybe there should be secondary objectives for survivor like finding parts for the gens.
Here's the problem.
I actually did this for a whole month - 2 hooking everyone before killing.
It's surprisingly hard to do, because there is inevitably that one survivor who constantly runs into you despite being on their last hook (what...you want me to just ignore you?) and that one survivor who hides the second their Spine Chill lights up and you can never find them.
-
@Marigoria said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925247#Comment_2925247
I'd consider myself a centrist as well (in a EU setting), and I totally agree.
Like I mentioned on my post, the original rainbow flag was inclusive. It was a LGBT+ flag, everyone part of the acronym was part of it.
When they started adding other flags on top of it, it's like after all people represented by those flags were not included?
By that logic, people can only assume that everyone else is also not included, so now they should be adding everything on top of the rainbow until none of it is visible anymore.
I'm not sure if the black and brown stripes are a part of race, correct me if I'm wrong, but all that shows me is that the original flag after all was also not inclusive of non white people, which imo, it always was.
They just ruined a simple, recognizable flag to a logo marketing monster.
The black and brown stripes were added after a racial activist group literally picketed Pride rallies because they were race-neutral, and the activists wanted them to instead focus on race.
This is the stuff that irritates me a bit, as modern activism seems to be rather vicious and selfish.
But...yeah, if you flip the chessboard, it all makes more sense. At the end of the day it's just business, within the economy of ideas.
South Park nailed it. I'm genuinely sad that 'scause' never became part of the online lexicon.
@AnneBonny said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925247#Comment_2925247
personally i think the larger issue is in people's desire for specific labels, gender and sexuality are too complicated for that
Believe it or not, this is where academia almost settled in 2015, with various authors going 'this is all getting silly, human experience is too granular and complex to be summarized into rigid oppressor/oppressed narratives and we need to stop' - but sadly, centrism has never been especially marketable and they were shouted down by identitarians.
-
@Marigoria said:
The only times I feel the need to mention my trans status and my sexuality is either in a dating setting or in a discussion about the topic.
I agree that the way BHVR went about it with the announcement was quite distasteful in my opinion.
I would rather have heard about it through the archives/tome than them to make a huge announcement about it.
David being gay? Fine. The announcement? Seemed forced to me.
@Bran said:
It's a weird situation in this forum that's for sure.
It makes sense if you remember that BHVR is a company, and a company thrives on publicity and good press.
Don't look to people who are, at the end of the day, trying to sell you something for moral affirmation.
-
@Marigoria said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925168#Comment_2925168
At least I'm not the only one who genuinely hates that flag.
The original rainbow was already inclusive, when they made this new abomination it just made me feel like after all trans people were not included in it after all.....
As the resident grumpy old forum centrist that finds a lot of this stuff rather silly - yup, the Quasar flag is a can of worms. The second you try to include basically everyone, going from an abstract rainbow flag to something with specific meanings, inclusions (and by proxy exclusions) and then pointing to your flag and going 'this represents you, this represents you and this represents me', now anyone left out will have a bone to pick.
Which is why the Quasar flag has been superseded by
or more commonly
And I'm sure more will be added as we go, with the flag getting denser and denser.
As someone somewhat on the outside of all of this, it makes me wonder when this becomes counterproductive.
-
@BenZ0 said:
I am not really interested nor have much knowledge about it, all I know is it is a tag where ppl that are non straight grp up basicly and want to support each other or their rights which is totally fine and nice imo.
However I see this often, same goes to BHVR here.
Why is it so important to spread the message officially across the internet that you are gay, trans whatever? If you are really considering yourself and want to live like this then you should do it for yourself not to tell it everyone around you trying to catch their attention somehow?
It just seems to be attention seeking if you scream that out loud just like what happened with David. Again nothing against that, couldnt care less, but why all that official outroar?
There are three ways to look at this.
- Having a character canonically 'x', where 'x' is whatever identity you've embraced, can be affirming to people at some level.
- It's certainly gotten people talking - with some lamenting and some celebrating and a whole lot arguing. There is almost no such thing as bad publicity, and it spreads awareness of your game either way.
- With the current hyper-charged political climate in online circles, it's sort of required right now for developers to insert representative characters, and tweaking the lore to make an existing character 'x' is generally much easier than making a new one (which tends to quickly become a no-win scenario as no matter what the new character is like, it will be considered extremely problematic by someone - aren't large activist bases with zero orthodoxy fun?).
That all said - there is zero overlap in this game between the lore and the gameplay. Laurie doesn't get a special bonus against Myers, for instance. It's a massive storm in a tiny teacup.
-
Honestly, this is about where I stand on this too.
If you don't like the lore of a character in a game like this, where the lore has zero overlap with actual gameplay and is mostly buried deep within the menus - make up your own.
I said this in another thread, but if I as a kid of 6 or 7 could play with GI-Joes, making the characters completely different to their established canon with one of the baddies being a good guy and some of the good guys being baddies - a bunch of adults and pseudo-adults can surely do the same with their virtual action figures.
This entire thing is what I'd call a nontroversy.
-
@Marigoria said:
I'mma say it, that new flag is just ugly, always has been. It's cursed aesthetically. Anyone else feels the same?
Sure we still have the original rainbow one, but it would be neat to get other flags like the Trans and Bi ones.
Shrug. I'm sure you will.
I think the devs went with the Quasar flag because it incorporates most of the currently in-vogue identities, without realizing what a can of worms that flag is.
@Marigoria said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925071#Comment_2925071
The problem with the faded colors is that the charms are already so small it's difficult to even see details like that.
I just hate how it looks aesthetically, it makes no sense at all to me.
My guess is that they wanted a charm that didn't glow like a road flare.
I love it when survivors use bright, glowy charms - it's like a massive bullseye that I can follow when they try to be sneaky.
-
@_ZZlaya_ said:
Again. I will try to explain the last time (even if you barely want to try to understand me).
Every player has his own favorite survivor based on any cause. It might be their overall impression of this character or the attractiveness of this survivor, or maybe players associate and represent themselves in such a way. So people who already liked and played David liked him in this way he was created until now. Some little changes could be applied, but very carefully, to not harm the main idea of this character. Just let him be as he is.
The diversity and representation for all people might be done just by adding new characters. And I am sure that the new gay survivor will have his own fan base.
That´s simple way, and nobody will feel disappointed, frustrated or deceived. Nobody will have a single complaint
If it's really eating at you - you can always make up your own head canon about the character and go with that. Write up your own little bio for David and stick it into a Word doc somewhere you can easily find it.
I mean...when I was young, I used to love my GI-Joes. And all of them had a little book of lore that I generally lost the second I opened the packaging. Instead, those characters could be anything to me. I mean...this was generally my 'good guy'.
And this was generally a 'bad guy':
Imagination is a powerful tool - especially in a game like this where the lore has absolutely zero impact or overlap with gameplay.
Make up your own little narrative regarding these little piles of pixels and polygons if you don't like the existing one.
@mileto_br said:
To be honest this whole bad comment of yours can be found in real life. I have been told the same after coming out as a gay man who has had ex-girlfriends: “it’s unnatural and wrong that now you’re gay… etc”. The truth is: I was born gay and it was about acceptance. I am sure that is the case with David and the new tome will bring light into it as mentioned before by Peanits in another post.
Finally, it is your mistake to assume that every character is straight and so sorry now you cannot thirst or enjoy a fictional character who has a different sexual orientation than yours =P.
Except that's...not what's happening here. This is more a Tabula Rasa character being confirmed one way or another, which disrupts the fantasy of people who had him running a certain way.
This isn't David 'coming out'. Because David is a character in a videogame. This is a decision by the developers.
I think that the entire complaint is silly, much as I think a lot of this is silly - but I'm also wary of implying bigotry where none exists.
-
@_ZZlaya_ said:
I feel totally deceived. My opinion is that such important information about any characters shouldn't be thought up and added to the lore after years of this character already being in the game! That is so forced, unnatural, you just have chosen one of the survivors and started to rewrite the whole his life!
You know, that´s really unfair. As a woman, I´ve just lost my favorite male survivor. I think that having some ideal characters, maybe even sexualized is OK in videogames, so why the hell you are don´t take care of the female part of your community???
I understand the needs of LGBTQIA2+ community, but you could make for them a new character so that your changes wouldn´t inflict the current fan base of any already existing survivor.
Eh. Looking forward to this all just dying down, because...honestly, even as far as this game goes:
- There are plenty more fish in the fog.
- It's a bunch of polygons in a videogame.
@IlliterateGenocide said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925034#Comment_2925034
As a gay man I see this stuff a lot, Turning characters different sexualities like flicker of a lightbulb. its dissapointing that they did it this way. but mabye the tome will make it better
The problem with making a new survivor is that no matter what the devs do, it's going to bring out ye olde wokescolds. We've already seen a few this time.
Make a new gay character effeminate? You're pushing a stereotype.
Make a new gay character traditionally masculine? You're guilty of queer erasure.
I think that worrying about the sexuality of a character in a game with zero RP is silly at best and a minefield at worst, but the devs seem well intentioned so even if I did care about this stuff, I'd probably try to extend a bit of charity to the devs.
That said:
@GoodBoyKaru said:
"I, as a woman, am now angry that the LGBT+ community have valid representation for it means I can no longer sexualise the character" babes do you realise how DERANGED this sounds
Grass is needed and ASAP
https://media.tenor.com/images/c90c9356888692ee99461af5ef8f1dbd/tenor.gif
I think it's more than a little odd that people are worried about the sexual identity of characters in this game at all. There's like...zero RP and the lore is so tangential to the actual game that I'm honestly surprised people really care about it.
@AsherFrost said:
I would say y'all need Jeebus, but he didn't do too much for LGBTQIA+ acceptance when he was alive and his biggest fans are kinda dicks about the whole thing so...
Y'all need Big Gay Al.
Isn't Big Gay Al considered seriously 'problematic'? I mean, I can find a ton of progressive thinkpieces about him along these lines:
https://medium.com/express-yourself/dear-millennials-with-apologies-to-big-gay-al-1c80f650113
@Rezblaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2925018#Comment_2925018
There are cases of gay men dating or even marrying women. This is done because:
A) The person may not have had the resources to understand what they're feeling due the stigmatization of gay people and the lack of resources to study it.
B) To prevent emasculation, due to toxic masculinity disowning homosexuality. David King is known to do brawls and collect debts. Toxic masculinity dictates these are "manly" things to do (physical altercations) but also disowns homosexuality as being emasculating. David probably dated a girl to prevent discovery and keep a reputation in the ring.
There is no such thing as 'toxic masculinity' any more than there is 'toxic femininity'. This term was popularized by some pretty obnoxious people circa 2010-2016 and purely serves as a way to stir up division between people.
I know gay people that are somewhat effeminate - but I also know some that are more traditionally masculine. Neither of these should be an issue.
@AsherFrost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/320906/david-ignoring-the-opinion-of-the-community
So basically
"I used to fantasize about this character in a video game. Now that I know he wouldn't want to be with me in real life, I'm upset. Why aren't you specifically releasing characters I can flick my bean to?"
Cringiest take so far. Actually reminds me of an old friend of mine who, upon telling a girl that had crushed on him that he is gay, had to endure months of harassment and abuse and "why couldn't you just do it for me, guys get hard all the time anyway!" Entitled toxic bullshit.
I'm sorry. I'm sorry that you can't connect with a character of a different gender unless you could have sex with that person in real life, That sounds like a difficult thing to have to deal with.
There are literally gay children all around the world who are being told daily that being gay is bad, and makes them a weak, craven thing. Some of those children will now be able to look at David and see even the King of survivors can be a proud gay man. Personally I think that's a bit more important than whether or not the game provides you with fodder for your wank bank.
I...don't think that this is a game I'd want children playing. It's a touch on the grisly side.
-
@Rythoriak said:
Something needs to change to further discourage this. 90% of people who do it do it out of toxicity because they want to show you they "won" and some enjoy trying to trigger people. I shouldn't be forced to walk to both exit gates and force the survivors out every time 2 or more of them survive because they want to tbag and flashlight click as they leave. I've gotten to the point where I will just stand in the basement and wait for them to leave and if they don't vote a thumbs down at the end of the match if they stay more than a minute when I know they're already at the exit gate.
And yes, I already know the common arguments:
- I want to give them a free hit/down to give them more points (Then why are you waiting a solid 2 minutes?)
- I want the last chase points as I leave (The killer doesn't need to give you these. Just leave and go on to the next match. You will literally get more points per hour leaving and starting another match than by waiting for your extra 200 points)
- But killers can do ____ and ____ and it's toxic, too. (You're right, we should fix those problems as well)
It's tricky to find a balanced solution to fix this as we don't want to make it just outright reportable because there is that very small minority that do it to be nice.
The only idea I've come up with so far is this: Make crouching to not be allowed in the exit gate area would be enough. We can't take away flashlights as killers still pick up survivors in the exit gate. However, there is no purpose to crouching in the exit area as a killer will see you even if you try to pillar hug walking around it. If people want to risk tbagging outside the exit are and maybe get downed and killed for it, power to them. At least they'll have a little bit of fear that they make die from it.
What is everyone else's thoughts on whether this should continued to be allowed or other ideas to offer?
I thought this would be about those survivors who insisted on playing hide and seek locker fun around Eyrie for an hour because they 3genned themselves.
Eh, if it bothers you stay out of the exit gates. I sometimes just go AFK once the EOGC starts and get a coffee or something.
@Laluzi said:
While I agree that the seemingly compulsory need to wait at the exit gates to taunt the killer is deeply obnoxious and the game would be better off if that behavior was discouraged in some way, there are legitimate reasons to crouch in the exit gates. You can hide behind the pillars to trick a killer into thinking you're not there in order for a flashlight save/to avoid being pushed out the gates when other teammates still need help. Crouching also ducks some projectiles.
Besides, if crouching was disabled, people would just stand there and point instead, or spin in circles, or any new form of emergent victory dance. Heck, the whole thing is rude even if I don't show up and nobody gets to do anything other than stand there and leave at the last second, because they still wasted two minutes of my time and they know it. The issue here is how engrained it is that you should taunt your opponents at the end of a match, not any one specific means of doing that.
I'd think this would better be dealt with by some form of sportsmanship rating. Kudos, maybe small rewards if other players outside your SWF like playing with you.
Yeah they had a thing about endorsements in the survey - would be a fantastic idea, because the poisonous community is one of the things that makes this game a bit hard to recommend.
-
@OpenX said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2924387#Comment_2924387
Against anti-loop killers the entire map is pretty much dead space lol, outside a few vaults that are not even that good without BL.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2924405#Comment_2924405
Nothing says you really need to even go to those though. Many times the gens are just sitting out in the open, which is going to be easy pickings for any killer with mobility. I am sure a decent 3 gen strat on this map with certain killers is going to be insane.
It's actually not bad gen wise. On one hand, some of the gens are pretty naked. On the other hand, the gens are pretty predictable spawn wise (this is such a big deal it's not even funny) and there are some safe ones too. It sets up a neat little risk/reward - try to burn down the weak gens early or nail the safe ones and then play an attrition game.
-
@Impalpable said:
Tunneling is first and formost the result of imbalance in the objectives of both sides.
Eh...
I'd replace 'tunneling' with 'snowballing' and you've hit it on the head.
This is a game of inches sometimes, where a small mistake on either side can compound into an inevitable loss.
-
@Heartbound said:
If 4 Survivors Escape - you lose
If 3 Survivors Escape - you lose
If 2 Survivors Escape - you draw
So if camping that one survivor won't change the outcome (you still lose) why are you not going for other survivors? I've always seen it as a concession.
Usually? It provides a pivot point where I can potentially have another crack at a win if they are altruistic. It adds a little bit more texture to the match.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2924375#Comment_2924375
The ones that aren't deleted.
I haven't been monitoring every thread, so I've missed things for sure.
It's been fun :) I have a weakness for not being able to stop myself from jumping into political threads, and there have been a few doozies.
That said, I've only seen one major freakout, and it could very easily have been a poor attempt at a Poe.
@OnryosTapeRentals said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2924429#Comment_2924429
Oooh I love spiders, that's actually a good idea.
As for the Progress flag, I think most of the controversy surrounding it is strictly online. Pretty much all of my friends are queer and I've never heard anyone take issue with it IRL. To me flag disagreements are in the same category as slur discourse, microlabelling etc; they're things that are polarising and controversial online but have litlle relevance in the real world.
'All the spiders' has gotten me bollocked out in postgame before - but if I'm playing killer, I'm bringing the scary.
The flag stuff (and all the rest) - yes and no.
Online political arguments are fun, but it's 10% actual genuine discussions, 20% two smart people sharpening their claws on each other and just playing Devil's Advocate and 70% people calling each other nasty names.
The thing is - this stuff is rife in academia right now, and some of the stuff being taught to new students was batty 5 years ago.
-
@OnryosTapeRentals said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2924399#Comment_2924399
"I'm a bit eye-rolly about the flag" I like the flag because it's one of the few charms I think looks decent lol.
I don't use charms on survivor, I find that it makes me too visible.
On killer...I either go 'all the spiders' or 'all the crows'.
I'm more eye-rolly as they used the Quasar flag, which feels like a well intentioned faux pas (it's controversial even within progressive circles).
-
@OpenX said:
Never thought I would say it, but after playing a few matches on both killer and survivor that is my conclusion
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/SWCOAOY13JOT/inkedbruh-li.jpg
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/8IIKRNKIO8RL/inkedbruh2-li.jpg
What in the world are you supposed to do with this?
1-2 dumpy pallets near a gen that get blasted through in seconds, or more than likely outright ignored by the anti-loop killers like Pyramid Head or Artist.
I was just running around like a goon this match and 4k'd. No real strategy involved whatsoever. Can you imagine 3 genning on this map? You will break 3-4 pallets and your 3 gen is secure for the rest of the game!
From what I've seen thus far, it's an 'inside out' map. The edges are fairly strong, but the center is a deadzone.
That said...let's say it's killer sided.
Now we've got 2, maybe 3 killer sided maps out of a metric crapton.
-
@Laluzi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2923837#Comment_2923837
Toxicity's a player problem, not a survivor/killer problem. I mean, yeah, a killer that camps and tunnels the first hook is more likely to be nasty in EGC than the average player, but so are the members of a SWF that bring all flashlights/sabo or all BNPs.
Like, there's issues with dominant strategies in this game being distinctly unfun, but that isn't a community issue so much as it is a design issue.
(By the way, StarLost, I did a double take when I saw you back! I thought you'd gotten banned and I was genuinely upset when it happened - you're always one of my favorite posters to see around.)
Thanks Laluzi! Yeah, I've been back for a while, but definitely on my last life forum wise. Just have to try to make sure that if I'm being obviously sarcastic about something, I mark it as sarcasm somehow :|.
-
@Pulsar said:
I haven't really seen all that many people upset that there's a gay character.
I have seen more people concerned over how BHVR went about revealing it.
But yeah, good for the people who are enjoying what BHVR has done.
I'm a bit eye-rolly about the flag, but eh - it's hard to describe how little I care about all of this. If it matters to you, then more power to you, but this has never been a game where I've cared overmuch about the characters and lore.
@thrawn3054 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2924376#Comment_2924376
I'm kinda in the it feels forced camp. I'd have preferred they made the first confirmed lbgt character lbgt from the start. It feels like a retcon to check a box rather than it being a natural part of the character with how they did it. That said I'm glad lbgt people got some representation. I just wish it had been done better.
It's a minefield.
Make an existing character gay = why didn't you do more?
Introduce a gay character who's traditionally masculine? Tokenism, plus queer erasure.
Introduce a gay character who's effeminate? Tokenism plus enforcing a stereotype.
I can see why so many companies just give it a wide berth.
@RavenBirb said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2924375#Comment_2924375
mostly on fb people have negative things to say i saw
People on Twitter and Facebook will literally come to blows over whether a dress is gold or purple.
-
@NinthPixel said:
This is why I almost always bring Rancor. Hooks are boring, weaving through body blockers to stomp a snobby bum hopper into another dimension is a prize to go for during the end game.
'Snobby Bum Hopper' is now the name of my ska band.
-
@Sluzzy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2924226#Comment_2924226
Usually the killer snuffs it before it is used more than once. When the sound being so obvious, there is really nowhere to hide it. The only time is even slightly harder for the killer is when there is more than one level on the map.
Haha what?
Put it at the top of the IWOM main structure, the Eyrie main structure, anywhere on the second floor of Midwich or the RPD library and - even if they know it's probably there - the time commitment is so huge that if they do go and snuff it, you come out ahead of the bargain.
@sizzlingmario4 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2924194#Comment_2924194
It is worse than selfcare for your first heal.
After that is when you begin getting value and it quickly becomes way better in terms of what you get out of it, IF you are smart about where you position your totem and don’t put it somewhere too convenient for the killer.
The latter half is key.
CoH wins me games when the Mikaela blesses the same totem right out in the middle of nowhere.
Smart survivors know where to site them.
-
@calem said:
I've honestly never understood people who get mad EGC camping. What else is the killer supposed to do? Both gates are 99'd, all survivors are healthy bar 1 on the hook. You cannot leave the hook or you are giving up a kill. There is no other objective for the killer to stop. Gens are done, doors are ready. The only thing left is kill whoever is on hook. And even then, if you're playing an m1 killer, the whole squad shows up to bodyblock and BT save.
From a psychological standpoint, I think survivors have been conditioned into thinking that 5 gens = win. Anything that disrupts that feels unfair.
-
@Sluzzy said:
I have hardly played the past few days because my drive to startup the game is almost non-existent. Looking at the player counts it appears my sentiment is shared among most.
I watched some Twitch to look at the patch and what I saw was not very encouraging. A popular streamer camping and tunneling everyone out of the match and eventually survivors gave up. I literally saw a Dwight and a Kate looking at a Legion in his eyes asking to be sacrificed because it was impossible for them to win. This is after the killer camped someone unnecessarily in the basement. Survivors not able to escape either and complaining about how bad their teammates are. Can I be reminded why the hatch and keys were ruined? Survivor gameplay is way too hard now. I actually saw no survivors escaping in a span of about 45 minutes.
The patch is 100% killer favored and now Legion is so overpowered there is nobody going to escape. Not to mention how unfun they are to verse. Survivors hit hard with more unnecessary nerfs is really causing a very lack of any enthusiasm. A fun boon mechanic ruined, there is no reason to use them now. I find it disappointing a healing perk has nerfed into the ground while buffing a killer that makes it extremely easy to injure people and actually down. Downing that fourth person is going to probably be happening a lot because of how long Legion can maintain his fast speed.
And now we have an old character with a sexuality change against his will that can potentially be targeted with no way to defend against that.
Balancing and priorities needs to change before the Titanic sinks. I can't be alone with this opinion.
Sigh.
Okay, let's dig in.
- If you aren't having fun, there are plenty of other games out there - hell, I'm currently being tempted by that Guardians of the Galaxy thing, the newly announced Mechwarrior DLC, The Riftbreaker, Lost Ark and No Man's Sky...and there's that new Path of Exile season starting soon.
- Yes, camping is a problem. It's being looked into but it's sodding hard to fix. Patience is a virtue.
- The game is absolutely not killer favored now.
- You've been saying 'the game is killer favored' for the past ...2 years?
- Legion is absolutely not overpowered. You can still loop him forever - just split up when he starts heading in.
- CoH...nerfed into the ground...what? The perk barely got nerfed, all the really nasty stuff about it is still there - you just can't use it and a medkit to heal as a duo mid chase anymore.
- There's nothing stopping any survivor from being targeted. What exactly do you suggest? Equipping a Pride charm gives you invincibility?
- You've been saying that the sky is literally falling since I've been on these forums. Just...stop.
-
@TheArbiter said:
Id like to hope that this is some elaborate sh*post...... But who am I kidding there are some really bad people who have no place in this community
It's a Poe. The OP is trying to make a point by being ironic.
I've seen better.
@Pike said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2924120#Comment_2924120
Why would it be a troll post? I relate more to Felix now and would like a refund on my time investment to put towards him.
Just...stahp.
If you're going to Poe, you need to be a lot sneakier about it. If everyone's calling you ridiculous, the Poe failed. For a Poe to be successful, you need to say something silly and get people to agree with you. It's all in the phrasing.
-
@Brokenbones said:
Why does a character being gay detract from everything else you mentioned about him
He's still an alcoholic football hooligan who loves a scrap
Which is the aspects of him that I identify with. The gay thing...eh. I've never particularly cared about who my fictional avatar gets it on with - particularly in games where nobody is getting it on with anyone.
He's never been one of my major survivors though, I generally run Yui (like...about half of all survivors, she's just so quiet), Ash (I'm an Evil Dead nut) and Lisa (that song will never leave my heart).
That said...
@HaunterofShadows said:
Did a blackout hit the forums' brains?
@BrokenSouI said:
Oh Jesus..
It's evidently a Poe.
-
@drsoontm said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2923883#Comment_2923883
It's the first time I get one I think (after a few years). Up to know the only strange teams were the odd inept thousands-hours players.
This also means I can't afford to be automatically nice with apparent beginners ...
Never be nice with anyone...initially.
This is something I've learned from this game - if you go easy from the start and get stomped, people will gloat at you and teabag.
Go in hard from the start and - if you're smashing face - then you can decide to ease up...and then and only then will anyone be grateful.
-
@Pike said:
I liked playing David because I could relate to him as an athletic, straight, white male. I have invested millions upon millions of bps into David and probably bought an outfit or two. I can't exactly remember if I've spent Auric Cells on him because I have around 2k hours over the course of 2-3 years and have all survivors, killers, and many cosmetics. I haven't played in around 4-5 months or so but always left the game installed open to the possibility of playing again if the game was ever balanced.
Anyway, I did think it might be nice to see the new Haddonfield revamp and Legion rework. However, today I learned that David King's backstory has been retconned for no obvious reason. I'm not gay and can't relate to him. I'm not sure why the decision was made to retcon a character that people like myself can relate to and have invest tons of time and resources into but none the less I want all the BPs and potentially any ACs I have invested in him refunded so that I can funnel them into a character that I can relate to. Instead of creating a new character that the gay community can relate to, your company decided that my personal preference (not to mention in game time investment) is not as important as someone else's with a different preference.
So, can we get refunds to spend on characters we can relate to? Its very important to many people to have relatable characters in videogames, movies, books, music, ect. If that is going to be taken from one group of people and given to another, thats fine, but I want my investment back. I can only imagine how terrible the gay community would feel if BHVR created a gay survivor they could get behind only to turn around sometime later and announce that survivor to now all of a sudden be straight.
Poe's Law is the only law on the internet.
-
@Icaurs said:
So I was playing of survivor and this happened.
The exit gates were powered and I was being chased by the killer on Badham preschool. Cut off I was forced to go down to the boiler room where he beat me to the pallet putting me in the dying state. My two teamates chose to leave, making me the only person left. The killer then picked me up, before dropping me, as he realised he never broke the breakable walls. He broke them, but then realised if he tired to carry me out of the room, I would most likely wiggle out. So he chose to stand there, for the entire end game, just to secure one kill.
Do players take issue with this sweaty mindset or do they see no issue with dragging out a match for 3 minutes to avoid giving me even a chance of escape If yes what do you think needs be done to fix this. If no, do you take issue with survivors being just as sweaty every match.
For those who are wondering by the halfway point I crawled out to give him the hook, because I was really bored and just waned to move on.
That is one spot where, as a survivor, I would try to never go down near - as it can be unhookable if you haven't already broken those damned walls.
Just crawl out and next to a hook. Do you expect the killer to just let you go, in a game where he got 0 kills thus far - likely to be teabagged and gloated at in postgame?
-
@drsoontm said:
I've not played since before the new MMR.
I came back today and had games switching from annoying to hard. It's probably better than getting only hard games during the first half of the night so ... yay?
The one thing I've notice though is that in a lobby one survivor was way less experienced than me and his friends (He was around 70 hours, his friends in the thousands.)
Bad luck, I thought, he was the first survivor I found, as Nurse, but I immediately noticed something was wrong. He wasn't moving at all like a beginner (good mind games, Nurse-trained, looking back, sliding over the walls, well timed DH, cocky). The guy had probably as much hours as his friends (and me). The guys were very obviously an SWF4 too.
So, is that the new "tech" to lower a team's MMR? You put one alt-accounts in the team?
(Still killed the guy, if only to confirm it wasn't a fluke)
You can lower your MMR on purpose, and then use that to either chimp newbies as a killer or roll over people in a SWF - but you saw much, much more of this under ranks, to the extent that even Fog Whisperers openly admitted to smurfing and deranking 'for more fun games'.
At least under SBMM it's a lot more time consuming and a lot less precise, and if you do it consistently you're probably going to get flagged for botting.