SunsetSherbet
SunsetSherbet
About
- Username
- SunsetSherbet
- Joined
- Visits
- 498
- Last Active
Comments
-
@LylakLavender said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3227994#Comment_3227994
Which makes me think BHVR loves toxicity. They need to remove the steal aspect.
I am fairly certain they have basically called toxicity an important part of the online gaming experience. They may have not said toxicity specifically, but were indeed refering to toxic behavior.
-
Doesn't seem nearly as bad as the holiday one did for killers.
-
At least it doesn't involve giving a massive mechanical advantage, like the Holiday event.
-
Because the devs refuse to buff Myers, and everyone but survivor-only players would laugh at them if they giga-nerfed what is already debatably the worst killer in game.
-
He isn't good at all anymore and is indeed quite bad. But he's not even in the bottom 5. Which should tell you just how bad some other killers are.
-
@Wezil said:
I think the flashlight changes are good but I also think there were bad-faith actors using epileptics as a way to get the change, which I don't like. I think everyone would have been much more accepting if people had been much more honest about why it was being removed. People wanted it removed mainly because of the BMing, which is a very valid reason. You could also say the other reason to remove it is for the small percentage of people with photosensitivity, which is also valid. But it seemed like everyone had epilepsy and photosensitivity when this was happening and at some point you really start thinking that these are bad faith actors.
There are numerous threads here and on Reddit about epilepsy issues that predate this change.
-
Why was Ghostface and Legion given music before trapper?
This is the same as questions about tomes. Seniority of the character has absolutely NOTHING to do with who is selected for things. I see Hag more often than Billy, and he got music. Hag is also amongst the oldest killers. The only other ones without music that are older are what, Nurse, Wraith, Trapper. Billy and Myers both have unique themes.
-
@SMitchell8 said:
Seeing Trickster was a killer and not a survivor.
A psychopathic blood covered murderer seems like an odd survivor.
-
Pallets don't need nerfing. Map RNG needs fixing.
-
Clearly we need to nerf all killers due to your extreme outlier situation that doesn't represent 99.9% of the playerbase.
-
I'd vastly prefer "nothing" over a patch that redoes maps no one asked to have redone, or that changes perks that were fine, or nerfs killer add ons "just because."
-
@OnryosTapeRentals said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3224382#Comment_3224382
Yeah and watch DbD gain that much and more back as soon as the Halloween event starts.
And then immediately lose all of it right after, which indicates people only really return for events and then the game fails to keep them hooked
-
Important to note that that is 1.1% of all players to ever own the game on steam. Not 1.1% of active players. I'd assume the majority of people who own the game do not play it anymore. Which isn't a knock against this game, by the way. No game is going to retain all players.
-
I don't think that's a "survivor only" type of thing.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3219552#Comment_3219552
Shrug.
I joined when this game was extremely survivor sided.
Now the game is fairly balanced (killer versus SWF) or a bit killer sided (killer versus solo) depending on how survivors approach things.
I think, between the time I started playing (early 2020) to now, I've had a total of 2 survivors give me a kill on a blowout game.
I started learning survivor last year. I'd say I've seen maybe 500, likely more killers in that time give someone hatch or a gate.
What I'm saying is:
- 'Killers' aren't a monolith. There are some mean ones and some nice ones. Ditto survivors.
- By the numbers (and I'm sure anyone who plays both roles will back me up on this), you are more likely to be shown mercy by a killer than a survivor, even though there will be 4 survivors to every killer.
- Many survivors expect to be let go if they're the last survivor - again, I'm sure any killer player will confirm how often we get BM in postgame if we don't give hatch. However, on games where all survivors escape, there isn't even a consideration of giving them a charity kill.
It seems that there's a double standard here, where killers are expected to abide by unwritten rules of sportsmanship that survivors aren't. Why?
To be honest, the only times I have seen survivors play nice, is if the killer gets visibly bugged. I HAVE seen survivors let a killer get a hit, or stop running, or even let themselves be downed, under circumstances. But this is exceedingly rare stuff. Things like when Pinhead released, and it was possible (but rare) for him to become stuck in walls/floor due to his teleport. I never ever see a survivor play easy just because the killer is having a bad game.
-
You don't become exposed. If she does not have STBFL, I am pretty sure you have time to just put the tape in while she is on cool down from the first hit. I'll admit that I may be wrong, though.
-
I don't really feel the game has become less horror. I feel some people have an extremely narrow idea of what horror is, and would probably be confused watching something like shudders top 100 horror movie moments, when something like Jaws came onto the list.
I'll never understand how Trickster isn't horror, for instance. He is a maniacal psychopath who enjoys butchering people and using their screams for his music. I don't see how it "isn't horror" because he's a pretty boy. Is American Psycho no longer horror, because Bateman was a generic yuppie indistinguishable from every other yuppie in the 80's? No. Horror doesn't exclusively mean disfigured man in mask with bladed weapon, or unthinkable creatures. Horror and comedy have also always been bed fellows, so it seems odd to point to any sort of comical cosmetic as evidence of "not horror." I mean, go watch Evil Dead 2, or Army of Darkness. The entire Leprechaun franchise is also half comedy and involves a leprechaun who kills people with pogo sticks and the like while telling lymrics. So, I don't feel this game has become "less horror" at all. I think it has widened its net to accept all aspects of the horror genre, instead of a very narrow main stream view of it. And I appreciate that.
As for AOT, For honor and PUBG? I don't know anything about AOT, so I cannot comment on the series itself. But, I don't feel cosplay costumes specifically preclude one from horror. You can have a horror movie happen at a con, if you wanted. For Honor has a charm, which no one uses. The DLC is rumored to be INSPIRED BY for honor, which to me, means we're going to get a totally OC Knight who simply has some flavor mention to the for honor world in their backstory. I cannot say how horror that character is until we see it. PUBG is rumored we're basically just again getting a charm, isn't it? For both For Honor and PUBG's case, it feels like those cross overs are more for those games, and less for us. I don't think a charm or singular costume somehow removes horror.
-
Game is declining in playerbase. This is an attempt to bring people back, via threat of missing out on stuff.
-
Disable post game chat if on PC.
-
It's a tactic called FOMO. Fear of missing out. They are attempting to inject more players into the playerbase by dangling FOMO over the head of players who have left, or are on break. It is a very powerful tactic in marketing and business. We've had it to a small degree for a long time, honestly. Charms are almost always limited time, really. I'll never get that tiki charm from 2 years ago, for instance. I missed out on the SAW charms because I was just done with the game when that tome came out. But, most don't care much about charms.
-
@WeenieDog said:
To me, dbd lost its horror element when myers came out. I never found him particularly horror-y. Pychological thriller, Suspenseful, but not horror. I know some movies have gone in some suddenly magic routes but to me, he was just a guy in a mask killing people.
This post absolutely mystifies me. A guy in a creepy mask who goes around murdering people on Halloween...isn't horror. What?
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
So, looking at the Trailer for the newest DBD event (which, tangent, Haunted By Daylight? Babes where's the creativity) it looks pretty cool. I like the event, I like the new Event cosmetics, I like the Event Tome cosmetics too.
But one thing struck me when watching the Trailer that's really left a bad taste in my mouth. Time limited cosmetics.
For those who missed it, the outfits for Dwight and Jane are both time-limited exclusives (as you can see in the "Available for a limited time only" sticker)
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/VG9262HZ2OUD/image.png
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/1B9FSDY7XIPS/image.png
And I just need to know, who asked for this. Why are we, in a paid for game, with paid for DLCs, locking cosmetics now behind time walls too?
Who asked for this?! Why are we gatekeeping cosmetics from those who aren't playing during the time frame, or from those who simply can't afford to purchase them? Why punish the worst off who need to save their money to get something they like?
Make it make sense. This is the type of behaviour I'd expect from Hi-Rez, not you. I'm so genuinely disappointed.
What a horrible idea. The more I see this in games, the less I spend.
The game is undeniably on a decline, and this is one of the strategies being used to try and pull people back in, using FOMO. If it works, then expect FOMO cosmetics to be as common as tome ones.
-
Licenses. They likely need a new license in order to use stuff from newer movies. If you look at most licensed characters, you'll note all their add ons, perks, powers etc refer to one specific appearance of them, rather than all appearances. The Myers we have is the 1978 Shape, and that's likely the only one they have a license to. The gown cosmetic was seen in the opening of the first film.
-
@Audiophile said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3219319#Comment_3219319
No. You prove that it’s sportsmanlike to destroy a 3 man team.
So the killer should do what? Also,why are you mad at the killer, and not the person who ruined your game? Also also, why do you feel the burden of your team behavior falls on the killer?
-
There is a massive group that thinks giving up/DCing at the first sign of hardship is fine, and that it isn't the issue
"symptom of the problem"
lmao. These people are why their solo queue experience sucks.
-
@twin187211 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3217955#Comment_3217955
Everyone keep saying team unless you know how your so say team play or your on coms with them it's useless
It honestly sounds like you want one survivor to be equal to the killer, in case you get bad teammates.
-
@twin187211 said:
I just went against a camping pig at start of match 5 Gens face camping I asked him why he said we shouldn't bring flashlights in the lobby I then looked at his build he had light born on Franklin's starstruck the killer should not be able to change perks when in the lobby with the survivors that's unfair
The survivor and killer are not equals, and the killer will have various advantages that the survivors don't. That's how this genre works.
-
@Marik1987 said:
Here is the deal:
You can only pick a killer 3 times a row, after that, you have to play at least 1 game with a different killer, before u can go back to the 3-timer.
What would u think about this?
hahahahaha No. What benefit is there for me?
-
I really loathe that they made BT basekit. Solely because it caused a floodgate of demanding every decent perk be basekit, so you can run 4 meme perks yet still be as threatening as a meta-kit user. And the devs seem to want to go along with it, since they are continuing to make perks basekit. Stop. Making. Perks. Basekit. I'm not even going to go "well, give killers some basekit perks to compensate..." No. Stop making perks basekit.
-
The best list since WATCHMOJO
-
Doctor Loomis for Laurie. James for Cheryl means we can do legendaries that are a different gender from the actual character, as long as they're from the same franchise. Please give me Loomis. I want to pursue evil.
-
@Rovend said:
I truly dont get the point in this. You ok?
Probably sick of survivors crying that the game is too hard because they can't 1 v 1 win the game when their team goes to idle in a corner.
-
Rules are for killers. Not survivors.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3217000#Comment_3217000
Toxic killers is a good reason
Yeah the killer was toxic to you, so you should be toxic to your team and ruin their game. Makes perfect sense!
-
How many perks do we need basekit before survivors are happy?
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3216791#Comment_3216791
You forgot two of the most important reasons:
- Survivor starts getting campedand tunneled early on, which is the least fun you could ever have in a video game
- Survivors have to go against something broken like a Starstruck Nurse with the most powerful addons and perks
Some survivors dc for the most ridiculous reasons, and it's sad. But there are also understandable reasons why survivors would give up early.
There is no understandable reason to selfishly ruin others games.
-
Other survivors are to blame for that in the vast majority of my matches. Not the killer tunneling and camping. It's people DCing/suiciding at the drop of a hat and turning a game into a 5 gen 3 v 1
-
The player benefits from having a deep knowledge of the game and of how their killer works. I see that as a positive. A newbie pinhead likely won't be able to figure this out first match. I see this as a reward for getting good and actually understanding the game on a deeper level. You're rewarded for understanding things like spawn logic. I don't see a problem with knowledge being rewarded. Otherwise, why learn any deeper aspect of the game?
-
I think most would be fine with that if the devs seriously buffed Myers to compensate. But, they seem unwilling to do that.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3216364#Comment_3216364
Points.
I want the points.
You know what? Fair enough.
-
Just get rid of the self unhook ability except in the case of deliverance, which would re-enable it with a 100% chance. Luck is a meme with no real use for 6 years, and 99% of the time "hook escape" is just "suicide button." Most self-escapes happen when the person is TRYING to kill themselves lol I am sure people will cry it's a massive survivor nerf, as if there were oodles of people genuinely going for hook escapes with their 4% chance. Just make it still function with deliverance, and give slippery meat a new effect (not the first time, I think?) There: Now people either stay in the match or DC and eat the penalty.
If you're worried about AFKers, then put something in to kick AFK players after a solid amount of time with no movement. Thus forcing them to at least move the character now and then to avoid a kick. Have kicks give a DC penalty.
-
Only thing that makes solo queue bad for me is other survivors.
-
The hatch isn't a win, it's at best, a pity escape so you don't cry that you had "no chance" when the rest of your team dies at 5 gens. I don't see the point in feeling you are owed an escape when you failed your objective. And I don't understand why people treat a hatch escape or escape without all 5 gens finished, a "win." It isn't even one, going by what we know of stats.
I don't see why we need to nerf perks so you have an easier way of an escape-loss
-
Open handed and bond. I don't enter solo queue without em.
-
Yes. He has nice music and I like his lines. I don't find him some unfair killer. I'd rather play vs him than a lot of lower tier killers.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
Someone is desperate for some points as KIller.
It's amazing to me some people still rationalize to themselves that the person being hurt by this is the killer, and not the 3 other survivors who now instantly lose because a big baby decided they wanted to leave due to getting downed because they can't loop. No, the killer isn't mad you gave him a free 4k. You aren't hurting the killer. You are hurting the 3 survivors who now lose by default.
Anyone who suicides on hook should never EVER complain about solo queue, either. Because the culprit for that being bad can be found in a mirror.
-
That would be the biggest balance change ever done. You'd have to redesign the entire game to a point that just making DBD2 would be less problematic. The game is built on add ons. Killers are balanced with add ons in mind. If survivors lost add ons then yeah, wouldn't matter that much for them. But killers are based around add ons. You can't remove them any more than you can just up and remove the sprint ability from survivors.
-
Movie: Jason, obviously. Xenomorph and Chucky are another two. Chucky will always be an issue for any game, because it's hard to balance a 3 foot doll. Candyman is also very iconic to horror. Even if "IT'S CANDYMAN" is a bit of a DBD meme at this point for "who is the next licensed killer?"
Book: Dracula, Frankenstein (both public domain by now, so, may not count for the question)
Games: I genuinely don't know. I guess Dead space or FNAF. I'd hate either though. But I don't think this is specifically about what I want
-
@hatchetChugger said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3213127#Comment_3213127
If you really think thats griefing, you need a reality check. Its to get the killers attention so you can get chased, or some classic bming which I don't think is a problem.
BMing is griefing. So again, why cater to you?
-
Pouring one out for all 3 stadia players.