SunsetSherbet
SunsetSherbet
About
- Username
- SunsetSherbet
- Joined
- Visits
- 498
- Last Active
Comments
-
Haven't experienced that myself. I don't usually experience much toxicity from the killer. Not enough to point out specific killers as being more likely to have toxic people.
-
7 stacks should just kill them. Flat out. The fact you have to drop everything, run to the survivor, and then win a chase all before he just goes and removes the7 stack condemn, makes it totally useless EVEN IF you get a condemn. And if they already got hooked twice, it's not really doing anything more special than a normal mori would, since you have to down them.
If that's too much then at the very least it needs to expose the survivor, and they shouldn't be able to just immediately run and clear it. They should be exposed AND risk dying for at least X amount of time.
-
Seems like it's 7 days to the exact time you bought it. I bought the DLC around 4 pm Tuesday last week. When I logged in earlier, I didn't have the charm. Logged in 20 minutes ago and I got the video intro and the charm. So it seems like it's time sensitive right down to the last minute.
-
When people complain about tunneling, are they basically complaining about not being good enough to win a chase, or the killer being much better than them and always winning chases? Because tunneling isn't like face camping, unless by tunneling you mean the killer was face camping and hits you off the hook immediately. He begins chasing you again. Win that chase.
And if you feel you didn't get to play the game, then that means you went down within seconds of the game starting, then immediately lost the chase again after getting unhooked, and then lost yet another after the next unhook. And to that I say, learn to win chases. Chases are part of the game. If you lose a chase, you still played the game. Equip DS if it's that big of a problem for you.
Also tunneling and camping being more common than ever is a direct result of changes made in the past 6 or so months of the games life.
-
No, and I think it would actually cause a decrease in players. My prediction is that there would be a short term boost. Then all the FNAF fans leave as well as long time players who don't want to play anymore due to that DLC. No reason to think there'd be any retention from the DLC. RE DLC basically had a 0% retention rate.
-
Don't have it. Would be nice to know what the requirements are. When you don't know how it's triggered, it's hard to tell if it's just RNG/Hidden condition, or a bug.
-
He always would have made more sense as the killer than Amanda did.
-
It's not even that good. If someone is rescuing another person, then you are already aware of where half the team is. So it is, at the very maximum, showing you where two people are. Call of Brine is the only one that seems any good to me and it's really hard to tell in practice when I use it.
-
@JonahsTablet said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2850064#Comment_2850064
How does the board game even work lmao, I'd be surprised if it was anything other than a glorified chutes n' ladders reskin.
Maybe they'll take it literally and it will be a timed game where you have to escape before daylight or you die.
-
FNAF
-
@deKlaw_04 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2849727#Comment_2849727
wasnt he making memes about Patrick?
He made a singular meme picture with Patrick shrugging, using a direct quote from Patrick, if I remember. I don't see how it was offensive. He took a picture of the guy from the Q&A, and then quoted something he said from said Q&A. Unless I am totally misremembering or something, or there were other ones.
-
@MonsterInMyMind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2849675#Comment_2849675
While you're not wrong it doesn't give people the right to "rip them a new one" on twitter when they're off on weekends does it suck it happened when they were off? Yes but it's gone now.
I think people do have a right to rip them a new one when their product is basically non-functional for an entire weekend. They should have gone back into the office immediately to fix it. I've played plenty of games where a major issue occurred during a weekend and in none of them did the devs just leave the game in a state of non-function for days. Usually it would get fixed within hours.
There are plenty of jobs out there where you might get called in on your day off due to some sort of emergency.
-
Don't worry I have plenty of easily disproven copium on how losing 50% of your playerbase in 6 months is good.
-
@Voodoo_Thirsty said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2844430#Comment_2844430
Sigh... This again?
Actually it would be more like you bringing your cousin to disneyland. He has a heart condition.Let's talk about this premise.
The kid has a heart condition. Okay, then why in the flying duck is that cousin going to an amusement park to ride dangerous rides that could cause his condition to get worse in the first place?
Remember now, the cousin knew he had epilepsy and the OP was aware of this also.
Terrible analogy that has no relevance to this very situation. Your argument will only work if nobody was aware of the condition.
In this case, Disney is legally culpable for anything that happens.Yes, they will be and I wholeheartedly agree that DBD is in the wrong for not putting a sign that warns people of epilepsy.
BUT, DBD itself does not inherently cause epilepsy. Third party programs that exploit a feature using a Macro that was never meant to flicker that fast is what causes them, so in BHVR's case, it's a little different from your Disneyland example.
Also, you are required to give reasonable accomadation for people.Accommodation? For what?
You do realize that people who have preexisting knowledge of their illness don't get much compensation nor appeal in courts right?
They actually criticize you for making a poor decision.
In fact, compensations are only given to those who didn't have knowledge of their illnesses. His cousin knew. Once again, your example only pertains to those who have 0 knowledge of their health issues and were ignorant about them.
Your initial post only works if we accept the idea all games equally cause the same sort of issues in all photosensitive people.Yes and that's exactly my point.
All games DO affect photosensitive people to a certain extent. That's why nearly ALL doctors will advise them to be VERY careful or even stay away from games all together due to this very reason.
However, DEAD BY DAYLIGHT is a horror game, with a darker screen, flashlights that shines light to the player, etc. Playing a few games can clearly prove this point.
I iterate once more:
- If you know you are epileptic, be careful of what you play.
- If you are going to take a risk playing a game that clearly seems like it could cause an episode, that's on you. No one else to blame.
- Unless you were NEVER diagnosed with an illness before, you cannot be proven completely innocent and not all the public will stand with you on your case.
That's all I have to say.
Really doesn't matter what you think, honestly. Courts will inevitably decide and there is really no precedent for behavior to win if it goes to that. Sorry. Behavior is objectively at fault. Your entire logic relies on this idea people with epilepsy cannot play any game at all, which is a lie. Why is this game different from every other game? Because the devs cannot program? The game objectively causes more issues for epilepsy than any other game and must legally have a warning, as any ride would. I'd just put the warning rather than risk my rinky dink game company going to court and also getting dragged through the mud in media.
"HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN IT WOULD GIVE HIM A SEIZURE BECAUSE ALL GAMES GIVE PEOPLE WITH PHOTO SENSITIVITY SEIZURES!" You have given zero logic as to why a person would assume DBD has worse photo sensitive issues than any other game. Your entire argument relies on the idea photo sensitive people cannot play games and should not and should know that when that isn't true. I have no idea why you speak so passionately about a condition you clearly have no understanding of at all. If you don't want to reiterate, then don't come back to the thread. It's clear most people disagree with you and aren't going to agree, and you're just digging this hole deeper and deeper. And yes, you get accomodation for neglect which this objectively is.
-
@xBEATDOWNSx said:
I'm so sick of doomposting like this.
46k CURRENT PLAYERS AS OF THIS MOMENT PER STEAMCHARTS
THIS TIME LAST YEAR, DBD WAS AT 35k
Yes, there was a drop off after the ALL TIME HIGH after the Resident Evil Chapter. EVERYONE knew that would happen. New players would flock to check the game out. Some stayed while some long time players left. This is not uncommon in games such as this. Every game as a service model has peaks and valleys. Look at PUBG for a prime example. By no means is DBD "losing players at an alarming rate". As I stated IN A SIMILAR THREAD YESTERDAY, if there was a 15% drop in player base compared to this time last year, sure I would raise an eyebrow but, numbers don't lie. Now I fully expect to see the same thing happen numberwise come join this year. I'll even put money on it.
God damn I hate these forums do much. This community is something else I swear.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/5FICIPO8WTY7/screenshot-20220309-103111.png
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/2RJ5HBCD3UE8/screenshot-20220309-103103.png
a 50% drop in steam players in half a year is an alarming shrinking rate. "We had less players last year" Well, not really, because I am looking at the steam charts and it shows 34,217 average in the past 30 days. In March 2021 the average was....34,160. At this rate we will end March 2022 with less players than March 2021. If the excuse is the big RE patch, then my question becomes: "Why does this game have a zero percent retention rate? What is it about this game that has caused every new player to drop it right after trying it?"
-
@Voodoo_Thirsty said:
I have to be blunt here and say that a person with serious epilepsy should not be any where NEAR a game that has a flashlight or anything that allows fast on & off light feature.
I mean, what was your cousin doing there in the first place? KNOWING DBD has flashlights that could cause something severe.
Feels more like short thinking on your part as a family member than the game/players' fault.
That's like me, bringing my cousin to play a clown game when I know he has Coulrophobia and being surprised when I see him foam at the mouth.
Actually it would be more like you bringing your cousin to disneyland. He has a heart condition. You go on a ride with no additional warnings on it and the park allows you on the ride. They have put up no indications of increased risk and give no warnings that the ride is more prone to causing heart issues than any other ride in the park. However, they are aware of these risks, they just don't inform the guest of it. You go on and your cousin has some sort of heart issue as a result.
In this case, Disney is legally culpable for anything that happens. They were aware of the increased dangers but took no actions to inform guests of the risk and actively ignored it, depriving the guest of necessary information to make their own decision on their health. I don't see the difference here, really. It is a very similar issue. The only way it really, to me, could be argued to be totally different, is if behavior didn't know of this issue. But that means you have to believe they have ignored every thread, message, question etc regarding these issues, which is unlikely.
Also, you are required to give reasonable accomadation for people. Don't want to? Go do business in a different country. It's not even like they have to remove survivors holy flashlight clicking. A simple very clear warning on start up would be enough to legally protect them. Also, not all things cause equal issues in photosensitive people. Most photosensitive people can play most games fine. This game causing such issues is not a normal thing found across all games. It's a DBD issue. And as far as I am concerned, behavior (the company itself) is legally responsible for whatever happens. If someone has a seizure directly caused by this game, which has no additional warnings it may cause seizures, then the company is 100% responsible for whatever happens and can be sued for damages. And when real life stuff is happening causing possible physical harm to others, you can no longer rely on the law ignoring it because "video games." Don't treat peoples health and safety like a bug you can ignore for 3 years. "But this PS4 warns you" isn't going to cut it. I sure get no warning from the game when I boot it on my PC. I also do not think possibly putting a warning in a tiny document I have to cross Mount Doom to see, will be considered sufficient warnings to those at risk.
Your initial post only works if we accept the idea all games equally cause the same sort of issues in all photosensitive people. Which is objectively false. If a photo sensitive person can play other games but NOT DBD, then it's the games issue and sufficient warnings are legally required, at least by my country. I think a simple extra warning on start up would be a better outcome than a possible lawsuit.
-
Because the game has lost 50% of its players in half a year partially because of the bad balance, and making it so survivors basically cannot lose is a good way to lose the remaining 50%, even if some people genuinely believe this game is immortal/losing half your players since MMR is a normal thing. When you're bleeding players, probably best not do massive one sided changes like that.
-
@fulltonon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2844247#Comment_2844247
Freddy is nothing more than M1 killer with weak anti-loop and a teleport, he is surely one of worst killers akin to legion.
Sorry, I can't take opinions like that very seriously, but anyone is welcome to have it. I just find it so wrong that I don't even care to bother arguing it.
-
Condemn needs to be unable to be removed once it happens. As is it's almost a trick. You WANT to go get that one person you got condemned for the first time in 3 games. But now you are committing to chasing this guy who you may not actually down. If you leave, he'll just remove the condemn and now you got nothing. There's no reason you deserve a cure all after screwing up so bad you somehow got condemned in the first place. Once it hits, that should be it and if you get downed, you're dead. It really surprised me on the PTB the first time I just ignored a condemned person to continue the chase I was on, and then noticed they got rid of it all because I didn't drop chase to go across the map and try to down them.
And also, since you have to down the person, it means the condemn doesn't really do much if they are already on death hook. All it has done is make it so you don't have to walk to a hook, like a standard mori. Where as with pig, the other killer with an instant kill like that, the traps just kill them, and you don't need to do anything. Guy across the map trying to find his box runs out of time? He's dead. Guy across the map gets condemned? Well, better go over there and spend some time chasing him around and then MAYBE he's dead. Honestly condemn needs to be on par with RBT's. If condemn is only there as a flavor thing, then buff everything else about her.
-
She's frustrating to play because she's not good and you're just going to end up with 3 or 4 tbagging survivors who feel like gods for beating day release D Tier killers. As for playing against her....well, that's hard because after the first day, no one seems to be playing her now. I ran into a bunch on Tuesday. Wednesday I played a couple of hours and saw one. Aside from that it was just the standard sort of killers I always see, using the same perks I always see. The only new perks being used were survivor ones by Yoichi's who probably doesn't have a bunch of unlockables yet.
This is a big issue with DLC killers being largely weak on release. It makes the chapter completely worthless and unhype. As a killer, I won't want to play her because they made her bad. As a survivor, I won't get to experience facing her because no one wants to play her and then likely lose. So what happens is that the new content is basically 6 perks (of which like one is probably going to see any play, if even that) and a new survivor skin (Yoichi in this case.) I used to be against new maps because there's enough and the devs seem to have an issue making good ones these days, but at the very least it would make the chapter more noticable. As it is I'd probably forget there even was an update if not for the unique main menu and the starting cinematic. When you make a killer no one wants to play, then the chapter basically has like a lifespan of 3 hours before everyone just gets bored and goes back to playing Nurse/Blight or survivor.
-
I mean I agree, but at the same time Otz's opinions aren't law and he has plenty of suspect and bizarre tier placements such as considering Freddy one of the worst killers, and seeming to always believe Legion is upper C to mid tier despite no one else on Earth feeling that way.
Also one of the issue with condemn is that you have to go to a survivor and win a chase against them once their are condemned, and they can also remove said condemn. A survivor can get condemned and then run off and clear it if you don't go over there and win a chase immediately. I've already had survivors flat out intentionally get condemned because they 1. Figured I'd want to try and get the kill and 2. Figured they could waste a lot of my time looping me if I got tunnel visioned into "I MUST GET THIS DOWN FOR THE MORI" while gens pop around me. And if you don't go for the mori immediately, you lose the chance entirely. If you compare this to say, Pig traps, Pig doesn't need to do anything. If the trap goes off, you die. She doesn't need to walk on over and down you. Condemn rarely ever happens and even on the rare case it does, it still doesn't mean you're going to get a kill from it unless you decide that it's worth it to drop everything and solely focus on chasing one guy regardless of how long it takes. So it rarely activates and even when it does, it's still not a guarantee it'll do anything at all.
-
@Shirtless_Myers said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2843867#Comment_2843867
It's not far-fetched in the slightest, you're just another blatantly one-sided player who only cares about killers. It's quite common on the forums, pretty unfortunate.
So do you play her? Because if she is easy mode guaranteed win as you say, you could get in enough wins by tomorrow to hit rank 1 from Ash 4 with her and get a huge extra bunch of blood points from the rank reset in a few days. Since she is an easy guaranteed win and killer queues are short, it should make sense that the people who think she is unbeatable would spend a single evening playing her to get their big bp reward in 2 days.
Somehow I feel the people who say this never actually play Nurse at all and won't even if you challenge them to, despite them insisting it's easy.
-
You seem to be under the impression this is a PVE co-op game.
-
Only the Asian version of the game? Other DBD Mobile versions have the other mori? That's weird. I'd have to wonder what would prompt only the Asian version to get a new mori. It's not like it's less violent or something, so I doubt censorship would be the reason.
-
Played for about 3 hours earlier. Ever survivor match was Sadako. Haven't seen anyone else yet. When Artist launched, I saw very little of her.
-
Hackers+Bad balance+a dev team that repeatedly goes on the record stating they don't care about your concerns and have no plans to address them. Why stick around when the devs do entire Q&A's just to tell you your concerns will never be addressed and in fact they may do the exact opposite? The devs plug their ears to the serious issues the game has (like hackers) and continue to push things much of the playerbase dislikes. And they have given no indication that they will change course. If anything, it feels like they have heard people want them to change course and have defiantly said "No!" The community is also a big issue. The devs do nothing to discourage bad behavior and even seem to think it's an important aspect of the game. There's a serious issue when your games toxicity is so bad that it is a physical hazard (strobing flashlight clickers against photo sensitive players.) Theories on the games player loss being something outside the games hands is also pretty false. If the player drop was tied to various changes like new games being released, pandemic restrictions going away, work from home ending, the holidays etc etc, then you should see the same sort of drop pretty much every where else. But when I checked a month ago, DBD's drop was very much not the norm. If the reasoning is that all the players from the RE dlc left, then the issue becomes "Why does the game have a literal 0% retention rate for new players?) a -50% drop in like 6 months is unlikely to be caused entirely by some outside factor.
-
Chat should just be disabled by default and you should have to through options to even enable it. It serves no point but to upset others. Oh, and to the one guy repeatedly trying to make some gotcha by saying someone accepted a friend invite: I've had survivors go to my screenshots for HOUSE FLIPPER just to insult me for a DBD game. I've had people go to my twitch and send me messages through twitch private messages, just to scream at me because my profile comments were locked. People who really really get upset and want to vent will fine a way. And as far as I know, you can't disable comments on screenshots on steam. Not unless you go and individually do it for every single screenshot you ever took, as far as I can understand.
-
@dugman said:
Now I'm going to have Chop Suey stuck in my head all night. 🤦♂️
Thanks, now I do too.
-
Same thing with Artist at her release.
-
devs will never remove it because they think it is an integral part of the gaming experience. People will come up with any excuse they can as to why it needs to remain in despite serving nothing but to harm others. Only way it's getting removed is if a lawsuit crops up due to them not addressing this.
-
@ThiccBudhha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2838246#Comment_2838246
Might as well just make it so he cannot activate chainsaw within x meters if they want survivors to get free unhooks against a killer with the niche of denying free unhooks. Why even overcomplicate matters?
Because most survivors want free unhooks.
-
A 3 v 1 is easier to win than a 4 v 1. The killer is trying to win the game.
-
I'd love a classic horror character like Dracula to get in. I'd be really excited.
-
There's no legal need to quickly put her back up like there would be with a paid DLC character. You wouldn't see Bubba disabled for months.
-
By punishing the killer for not playing the way survivors want.
-
@egg_ said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2830991#Comment_2830991
Yeah, might be that if you lose 3 gens in a single chase and proceed to facecamp then it's cause you have no clue how to properly play killer, and by not engaging in other chases at all then you don't learn anything either
Sounds like a major failure in the MMR system then.
-
Survivors: "Chases are the most fun part of the game!"
Also survivors: "I hate when the killer repeatedly chases me instead of letting me do gens!"
I really don't get it.
-
@Gamedozer7 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2831070#Comment_2831070
Just because it's not programmer doesn't mean they aren't diverting resources. It still takes money,someone from BHVR had to be involved to make sure that it follows the main game. A company only has so much resources and adding a new product will enviable take resources from somewhere else.
I'm 99.9% sure they just licensed DBD to a board game company. They don't need to be hands on unless they want to, and I don't see why they'd want to.
-
I'd wonder how you make a board game of DBD. But if you can make a board game of tetris and street fighter, then I guess anything is possible.
-
So, correct me if I am wrong. Doesn't every survivor need to have the same sized hitbox? So, small Feng has the same hitbox as large David? Because if so, that would explain why the majority of times I see people post evidence of Huntress hatchets being unfair, they're playing Feng, Claudette, Mikaela, etc etc. I would assume the hitbox extends out past the model or something then, as Feng and David are not similar sizes visually. And that would mean you should probably go play a larger male character if you don't want to see "unfair" hatchet hits.
But I'm just theorizing on that.
-
If behavior makes a change and it goes poorly, it's their fault. Doesn't matter if others asked for it.
-
I have no issue with Bubba's and every camping Bubba I see loses the game hard. Sucks if you're the one it happens to but if you get real good, you can run said Bubba for 5 gens and you won't get face camped.
-
I played 5 survivor games the other night and in every single game, the killer face camped. Why did they do this? Because in every game except one, the killer lost 2 to 3 gens before getting a down let alone a hook. So they took their first hook and just face camped because they have already lost the game with 2 gens done before a down. And in every case but one, they were lower tier killers. The one guy who wasn't losing all his gens in record time was a Blight on a favorable map. And he still lost.
Might be that face camping is a symptom of another issue, rather than the problem itself.
-
Because that was years ago and design philosophy changes over years. It is inconsistent now and they SHOULD reduce her TR now.
-
We know how the system works. It's pure numbers.
-
I am not sure this will really solve her issues, but it's a welcome change and more than I expected.
-
And later you'll complain NOED is OP after telling everyone to not do bones.
-
I find Wraith very boring to play.
-
Happens every now and then. Someone makes a NOED thread, it gets popular, spins off into a few other threads and then dies down. It comes in waves every couple of months.
-
@gendoss said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2822990#Comment_2822990
No It's not because people expect to escape it's because they can play amazing all game and then die at the endgame because the killer was rewarded for playing badly all game. It's completely backwards and against good game design which this game struggles with a lot tbh.
If you didn't do bones, then you played badly.