Terro
Terro
About
- Username
- Terro
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,597
- Last Active
Comments
-
@SunderMun said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1808424#Comment_1808424
I know! I'm just saying, if Hit Validation works as the devs claim it is intended, even hits like this should not be happening.
I never had much faith in the project, and would much rather they did something about people who VPN where possible, since it probably takes a lot of resources to potentially simply not work, just like the MMR system.
Even if hit validation worked as intended you'll still be seeing hits like that. Even if you had hit validation be fully survivor sided you'll still see bs hits (it'll be much rarer but across all players you'll get a bunch of juicy clips) or teleporting killers. There's no way to get rid of it in an online game.
-
I kinda want to make a thread that just says "stop complaining about complaining about the Mori change". Then hopefully some1 else will make another one that's "stop complaining about complaining about complaining about the Mori change". Then it keeps going on and on.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1807623#Comment_1807623
Bugs with the ps5 could be a hardware problem for all we know. You only said bugs.
Really? Who calls hardware defects "bugs" any more? I haven't heard that in over a decade, and even then it was only in a historical context. The situation was also a software issue, which made it all the more clear that it was a software bug.
As far as I'm aware ppl use bugs for anything and everything. Also, hardware can have bugs too. It doesn't need to be a physical defect to have problems with hardware bugs that's not a software problem.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1807594#Comment_1807594
You mentioned hardware first not me and just because the law hasn't caught up to software yet doesn't really matter.
I mentioned a software problem, not a hardware problem. All your examples were for hardware that was actively dangerous.
If you want to defend companies that's your choice.
Yes, yes, I'm a corporate shill or whatever.
So op should pay for something cuz bhvr screwed up and the fans are divided? Wow imagine if this becomes law. We would be completely screwed.
No, OP should pay for something because they want to force everyone to stop enjoying a product they paid for.
Bugs with the ps5 could be a hardware problem for all we know. You only said bugs. It doesn't really matter.
If you want to frame a problem one way that isn't fair, then I'll frame the problem a different way that also isn't fair.
-
@Seanzu said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1807581#Comment_1807581
You want to rollback, that is DELETING peoples progress.
Rollbacks for games are almost, like i've already said, hours after the issue, not days and days, refunding me and rolling back my save will not give me back what I've played and earned and spent on Elodie & The Twins, I'd rather they fix it over removing my hours and time spent maxing them.
U do realize that you're the only one saying roll back right? And now you're arguing a semantic game. Ps not every rollback has been a complete rollback that deletes everything, even though they've called it a roll back in the past.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1807566#Comment_1807566
You do realize that product recalls exist for when a product has dangerous defects. It could just be 1 in 100 ps5 that spontaneously combusts. They'll still tell everyone to return them even if 99% of people are enjoying themselves bug free.
Not comparable to the current scenario. Software is not hardware.
There's also class action lawsuits that happen when products come out that have problems with them. People have defended Nintendo's joycon drift saying it doesn't effect them but Nintendo has been sued multiple times and lost multiple times.
See above.
You're welcome to have your own opinion. It doesn't really reflect what the op is saying and it makes very little sense for the op to pay for bhvr's mistakes.
It makes a lot of sense for OP to pay because they want to deprive everyone else of a product they enjoy.
You mentioned hardware first not me and just because the law hasn't caught up to software yet doesn't really matter. If you want to defend companies that's your choice. There's also the fallout 76 law suits. I know some won in the EU and Australia but I don't know if all of them won.
So op should pay for something cuz bhvr screwed up and the fans are divided? Wow imagine if this becomes law. We would be completely screwed.
-
@Seanzu said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1807514#Comment_1807514
A mass rollback & refund system doesn't work, regardless of whether it's automatic or not.
You can't just force a roll back and delete peoples hours of progress, rollbacks on games are almost always a few hours after the fact, not days and days.
People have undoubtedly had new bank cards etc, you can't just mass refund everyone and delete all their progress, that's ridiculous.
So now we've moved on to just we can't because we can't... U also don't need to delete ppl's progress to have it refund. Even on Steam you can refund a game and rebuy the game later without losing progress. Whatever I'm done with this.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1807505#Comment_1807505
And comes out of whose pocket?
To put this into an analogy:
OP is asking (demanding?) that Sony stop selling PS5s and instead take them away from everyone because it has bugs. Now, thousands, perhaps millions of people are enjoying their PS5s just fine and want to keep using them while Sony fixes the bugs, as evidenced by the fact that they're still using their PS5s - a fact OP literally admits. Does that seem reasonable to you?
IMO, if OP wants to force everyone to stop using something they like because OP doesn't like it, then OP should pay for the refunds for those who would otherwise be enjoying the content. I didn't buy this chapter, but I'm not a fan of having the things I pay for taken away because someone else thinks I shouldn't enjoy them.
You do realize that product recalls exist for when a product has dangerous defects. It could just be 1 in 100 ps5 that spontaneously combusts. They'll still tell everyone to return them even if 99% of people are enjoying themselves bug free.
There's also class action lawsuits that happen when products come out that have problems with them. People have defended Nintendo's joycon drift saying it doesn't effect them but Nintendo has been sued multiple times and lost multiple times.
You're welcome to have your own opinion. It doesn't really reflect what the op is saying and it makes very little sense for the op to pay for bhvr's mistakes.
-
@Seanzu said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1807493#Comment_1807493
Dealing with one person, per day is fine, makes perfect sense and is easy to do, dealing with tens of thousands of players who have spent their respective currencies tens of thousands of different ways is illogical and impractical.
When they give everyone something it's easy "give everyone 300,000 bloodpoints" is 1000x easier than "give 100,000 people, 1,000,000 different things".
... You really don't know how databases work do you? I really doubt the devs abilities to do anything but even I'd draw the line at the devs removing functionality from database software, unless they, for whatever reason, decided to create their own. Even then it shouldn't be that difficult to roll back or if they didn't bother to have back ups to make a function to do it. They don't need to do it manually. I think that's the point you're missing.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1807493#Comment_1807493
And who's going to pay all the people who don't want this? If someone bought the DLC and doesn't have access, is the OP going to pay for them not being able to play it?
It's called a refund?
-
@Seanzu said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1807466#Comment_1807466
We don't even know how that would work, or if it would even work.
People have spent points, spent iri shards, bought clothing that isn't in the old patch but is on characters that are, I highly doubt they have systems in place to rollback all those things, it's highly illogical.
Unless they're handling points and stuff client side, which I highly doubt cuz that would be easily hacked, or not bothering to keep records, which would leave plenty of vulnerabilities open for people to exploit, I think it's safe to assume that they have records of what ppl bought and with what currency within their systems. Furthermore, the devs have already been shown to be able to increase or decrease currencies either through bugs or on purpose and they have investigated claims people made about blood points or shards appearing or disappearing in the past. It's highly logical. You just need to actually think.
-
@Seanzu said:
"Just disable this thing that people have paid for"
It's better to fix it than disable it, a lot of bugs aren't even Twins related so disabling them separately wouldn't solve anything.
A lot of people did call for refunds. Also, the op asked to revert to the patch before this chapter.
-
@Ivaldi said:
I would love this.. it sucks that crossplay was suppose to bring the community closer together but the lack of communication put an even greater divide between the two sides.
I don't think anyone wanted the community to be closer, let alone thought crossplay was the thing to do it. We just wanted better queue times. Ultimately, that didn't happen...
-
My point was that the discussion should be more about how half assed changes are being made and I used the Moris as an example. I really don't care about the Moris themselves just that they could've done so much more in the time they spent.
-
@Crowman said:
Keys are no where near as bad as Moris. We can stop acting like they are absolute equals in power and deserved to be addressed at the same time.
Keys are going to get nerfed, just be patient.
To be fair, keys are stronger than Moris now.
-
What's the point of having him in this game? They'd brutally nerf his abilities and turn him into something really lame. Just imagine Alex shrugging off getting a tank thrown at him in his game. In dbd he'd get smacked by a pallet and run slower than survivors.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1801731#Comment_1801731
Since when? Ts, maybe, but bi erasure is still very much present.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1801732#Comment_1801732
I think they'll do it well, but bad-faith actors will try to make it seem like they didn't.
I've seen stuff about bis going both ways or something and it's supposed to be more about sexuality not just... Somehow erasing LG issues. I really didn't fully understand what they were saying.
Edit: also unintended pun.
-
Isn't this the opposite of a lot of complaints that are happening recently? LGs are feeling that the BTs are dominating every issue.
-
@Elena said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1801648#Comment_1801648
So by your logic, no one should speak out about their experiences to avoid hurting others and reminding others of their experiences? K
No my logic is to avoid unnecessary harm. You do not need to repost the words. You've bypassed the filters. Saying that they said the n word and other homophobic words are good enough.
-
It's not the perks that are toxic. It's the people. Just use pebble and throw them at your teammates. Had some1 do that to me.
-
@Elena said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1801162#Comment_1801162
The difference is, this person isn't making fun of those words or making money of it, so you can't really compare that to this thread.
But the defence for both still remain the same.
In some ways it's actually worse in this case, since the logic here is that these words are bad and hurtful to their respective groups. What's the point of reposting them verbatim? Oh these words will trigger bad memories for these groups. Gee I better repost them to get more people to see them to protect vulnerable groups from seeing them. It's different cuz I didn't type them out. I just reposted the whole thing. Definitely seems like you care about the groups and not the fact that somebody just wrote the words. /S
Why are you trying to protect this? The screenshoot is 100% not needed. Do you think that nobody will believe that some idiot in an online game said the n word?
-
So the logic here is that because perks have situations that they are kinda useful and they all technically provide a positive it means that they're good but other perks are just way better. I think you're mixing up good and the idea that all perks can be used to a certain degree of effectiveness.
-
I keep thinking the twins would be in a swamp cuz they remind me of Shrek for some reason.
-
@Aneurysm said:
I think the main reason by far for actually changing him is the statistics/kill rates, although some seem to think "survivors whining on the forums" brought the change about (I think people overestimate how much interest the devs have in forum complaining)
To be fair, the same survivors who whine on the forums are the ones giving up as soon as they see a Freddie. Instead of trying their hardest or figuring out ways to buy time for their team they just get easily tilted and die driving up statistics.
-
@Elena said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1799898#Comment_1799898
What kind of ######### up logic is that? He's posting the picture to spread awareness of what goes on in the end-game chat, how he reported them for racism and homophobia and how it was left unpunished.
The logic is that they DON'T need to post the freaking words. You have all these people looking at and reading the words and going "oh no! How terrible!" Yeah yeah... Good job feigning outage after reading the words and looking at them. You should be like a certain YouTuber and go to a suicide forest to film bodies to spread awareness about how awful suicide is.
-
I thought this post is about how if as survivor you crush the killer and do all the gens quickly you pretty much get nothing out of the match. You might even depip. I'm sure if killer just kills everyone in 1 hook they don't get much either.
-
The fact that you're posting the picture of the homophobic and racist words kinda makes me think you don't truly care. Some 1 posting the words vs some1 posting a picture of the words isn't much different imo.
-
@Healthore77992 said:
I don't think they are that bad, I've been playing them a lot, however the only things I want are:
1. Faster switching between them.
2. Survivors shouldn't be able to kick Victor after successfull hit.
3. 20 seconds to recall Victor.
4. If Victor is attached to somebody, ee should be able to see their aura as long as they are carrying him.
That's about it.
Faster switching between them would make camping much more viable with them. It's one of the reasons why I don't think camping with the twins is really all that much threatening than other killers camping.
-
Realistically, some1 giving you a message shouldn't heal wounds either. Also these survivors are surviving some seriously brutal hits. Finally, I don't think it would really be that fun to deal with.
-
@Dak said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1799857#Comment_1799857
- Leave Victor at hook
- Go chase someone else
- KI procs when someone goes to save
- Swap to Victor
Crouching works or:
5. Survivor unhooks before Victor can attack.
6. Victor attacks and since there are 2 survivors he gets kicked
7. Charlotte lost whoever she was chasing and Victor lost whoever he was camping.
-
Well if that fits your criteria for being scummy then... I'm not sure if you're right about whose more scummy. What's the criteria for survivors being scummy? Hook bombing? Doing gens too fast? Not respecting the killer? Suiciding on hooks? Keys?
-
@AggressiveFTW said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1799142#Comment_1799142
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1799145#Comment_1799145
If you would actually read the comments you would see that I replied with this: "Just give the downed survivor the ability to disable the ability to drag them away while being downed...".
Seems kinda useless to me outside of SWF. Worst case scenario some dumbo keeps trying to drag and I keep interrupting them. Then they just leave me to die cuz they've decided that since I don't want to be dragged I don't want to be saved or I'm a detriment to the team so saving me is useless. It's just not worth doing in soloqueue and you'd maybe use it in SWF for fun.
-
Now I'm just imagining the beautiful bugs an autonomous walking Charlotte could cause.
Ideas for possible bugs:
1. Major pathing issues. Getting stuck on walls, rocks, hooks, etc.
2. Other pathing issues. Long detours, going the wrong way, walking in circles. Maybe Charlotte's just taking the scenic route.
3. Survivors bugging her pathing by nudging her around, dropping pallets in her way or other ways.
4. Getting lost. Who knows if Charlotte just glitches through the ground or through a wall and walks off into the sunset. Maybe she'll even get stuck in glitched spots like inside a wall or somehow gets stuck ontop a pallet.
5. AI takes over. The player might not be able to regain control of Charlotte.
6. ??? Who knows what else...
-
@The_Bootie_Gorgon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1795942#Comment_1795942
We as individual players only experience what we experience. Our experience could be more clouded by emotions because we have that personal experience of trash. A "God's eye" perspective shows all experiences, and it might be possible that what we experience personally is not experienced at a high percentage.
The problem with a God's eye is that were humans and not Gods. We struggle to understand and interpret what it sees, what it means, the cause of it, etc. Let alone figure out the correct solutions.
For example, time and time again ppl, including me, have been complaining about red ranked potatoes (solo queue) playing awfully, sand bagging and/or just suiciding on hook. The statistics don't even reflect what I see. I expected much worse but at least it proves to that it doesn't matter what the killer is doing or playing. Solo queue survivors are going to die regardless. Please just fix match making. You can't stupid proof this game. I'm an idiot yet the other solo queue survivors are somehow dumber.
-
@Bard said:
No gameplay changes.
If you punt or Head On Victor, he goes flying like a hatchet.
If you rip him off your back and slam him, he bounces.
If you pallet stun him, pancake.
You never know what'll happen with the added strain to the game if it tries to simulate physics with rag dolling. Could accidentally crash the servers and cause a worldwide blackout.
-
@Zaytex said:
Agreed. Rescuing immediately means the Killer is in the area and will likely come back to the hook or stay around.
Plus the most efficient thing to do is leave a teammate on the hook just before they go onto the next hook stage and use the rest of the time for a generator or something.
That's not true. It depends on what the situation is. In certain situations, the most optimal thing to do is to unhook so you have 4 survivors working on gens again. It all depends on what's going on in the match.
-
@MegMain98 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1792637#Comment_1792637
Spirit on release was on really considered weak because of directional audio and people didn’t know how to play her. She had DUMB STRONG add-ons, collision while phasing, no window vault animation, etc...she was really that weak.
Deathslinger and PH are not weak. They don’t have to be Nurse tier in order to be considered strong.
I think you're forgetting how the tile sets used to be, how nearly every pallet was safe and the sheer amount of those safe pallets. That's why spirit fury + enduring was used in spirit cuz her power wasn't that effective with the old tilesets and safe pallets. The only way to use her effectively was to ram through those defences. Once those defences were gone spirit had an easier time using her power, which still had some trouble with the tiles back then.
I never said that deathslinger or Pyramid Head needed to be nurse level. I said that they have one aspect about them that really stand out to people but when you just look at them overall they're not as strong as people make them out to be.
-
@wisdomwielder said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1793451#Comment_1793451
You can't deny that Undying is insanely oppressive when paired with Ruin compared to other regression perks. I almost never lose a game when I run this perk combo. Its like running DS/Unbreakable.
I don't think undying + ruin is all that oppressive, especially at Red ranks. It's definitely a problem for bad teams of survivors aka solo queue, since it makes it extremely difficult for a good survivor to carry the bad survivors. A full team of bad survivors has no chance. The problem is matchmaking and how there's so many potato red ranks. I'd say do minor tweaks at most like my suggestion but fix matchmaking first before making big changes. I'm still hoping MMR comes out and it works well.
-
Eh, I don't think that matters too much. Personally as a survivor main I don't think I'd even care about a nerf like that. 2m is such a short distance that it's super rare that a survivor doesn't see the totem if they're that close. At the same time, you should be keeping an eye out for the killer regardless of if you know they have undying or not and assume the killer might be coming. What difference does it make if you as a survivor know that the killer knows that you're there? I think they should just remove the reveal for x seconds and only reveal a survivor if they're within 2m of a totem.
-
@Rydog said:
Man, how did they not see this coming when they were developing this killer?
They probably did see it since it's directly caused by the balancing of this killer's power. I don't think there's a real way to fix it without a rework of some kind, since anything else will either make the twins op or nerf them to oblivion.
-
Uh... U answered your own question. They have addressed them. Unless you mean something else, like address them in terms of balancing.
There are a lot of perks and even killers made to deal with certain aspects of the game. It doesn't mean the devs are saying that those aspects are bad for the game or unbalanced. U have self heal in case some1 is tired of having to look for other survivors to heal them. Killers have undying to use if they feel that totems disappear too quickly. Survivors have spine chill to help them keep an eye out for the killer. Killer's have BBQ to help them keep up the pressure and snowball.
-
Rip looks like you aren't leaving the game.
-
There's a difference between there being a massive risk to some1 doing the unhooking so they don't go for it and your team just being idiots.
-
@MegMain98 said:
People call EVERY new killer weak on release. Spirit was considered weak, now she is completely hated and one of the strongest killers despite getting nerfs. Deathslinger was considered weak. Pyramid Head was considered weak. Now look at them.
People will jump on the “new killer is weak” bandwagon ASAP.
To be fair, dbd when spirit was released was very different. I remember spirit was actually kinda weak in the meta until they buffed her. Then they kept her the same as DBD got rebalanced. Deathslinger is still considered weak outside of boring chases. Outside of Pyramid head's animation lock Pyramid Head isn't really considered top-tier strong either.
-
@danielmaster87 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1788142#Comment_1788142
Survivors getting on top of things they're not supposed to has an easy fix. Just put more of those invisible walls that go up to infinity so they can't get on there.
Wouldn't that block ranged attacks from Huntress and death slinger? Also, Victor. Plus, there might still be a few weird places you can land like at a window or on a pallet.
-
I dunno with blight. This is from a survivors pov. Part of me still thinks that blight requires a skilled player plus the map rng lining up correctly. Most solo queue survivors haven't seemed to work out how to deal with blight at all. They seem to play the same way with loops and try to gain distance against him. I haven't felt like I've lost to a blight for a while now. It's always been my team never figuring out how to do a gen or last longer than a ten second chase against him. Yet, if the blight chases me they don't feel too difficult to deal with. I guess that's why both sides like him.
-
@Slendy4321 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/210366/why-is-this-a-thing
This is what I'm talking about when I say something should be done about this Killer. They down a survivor run him to the closest hook and then take the downed Survivor hook and as soon as they get a Killer Instinct they switch back and injure the rescuer or redown the recently hooked Survivor. People been like "Just kick him forehead" HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO KNOW THAT HES NEARBY WHEN I GET TO THE HOOK. Everything about this chapter infuriates me
They mean kick him after he pounces. If he downs the other person on the hook, kick him. If he downs you, the other person kicks him. If he injures you, toss him to the ground. Worst case scenario, if you really want to, go look around for him. It's the same thing I tell killers dealing with downed survivors at pallets.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1789323#Comment_1789323
It does, you're just taking it too literally.
@Volfawott said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1789181#Comment_1789181
Let me put it in this way.
That noed this can give you a "free" kill in endgame
You don't have to do much too earn besides make it to endgame and hope you're lucky that there is a totem left alive.
In the grand scheme of things it is not "free" you're locking yourself into only three perks for the majority of the game and there's no guarantee that when the exit gates are powered you'll have a totem left.
The Perk is a gamble due to these conditioned it's not exactly free however someone might use the phrase "it's a free kill" to state that it is undeserved because of how little effort was used to obtain it.
As for how much effort it is quite easy to determine how much effort is put into getting a perk. Old MoM required you to get hit 3 times. You could potentially go afk make yourself a sandwich and by the time you come back you would have had the perk activated.
Like it or not there is no effort in obtaining that you don't need a 700 IQ brain to realise that.
Volfawott is literally pointing to a perk's effect and calling it free. That's what the perk did. Why the need to add free to it? What's the point of saying it's too easy for some1 to do something? Just say if you think it's strong, weak or unbalanced. There's no difference between that and what I said about doing a gen is free gen progression or saying self care gives free self healing but ppl don't use free in that way for a reason.
U do u both of you. I've already said what I wanted to say. I believe we've reached an impasse. I say it only shows bias and it doesn't really make sense to use it that way
-
@Sonzaishinai said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1789181#Comment_1789181
You are seeing a lot if negativity in a word thats not negative at all.
Free just means with little to no effort. Nothing more, nothing less.
That doesn't discredit anything you did to get in that situation, it just means the act itself is effortless.
I'm not saying it's negative. I'm saying it doesn't make much sense.
-
@Sonzaishinai said:
Calling something "free" it's meant as with little or no effort.
For example if you're caught in a deadzone against bubba he get's a "free" down cause compared to most other killers it's with little to no effort.
It's not an argument it's a manner of speech
@Volfawott said:
I will agree that the term free is usually overused as much as I can find things like defensive strike and noed annoying they're not exactly three it still takes requirements for its to actually come into play hell even old MoM as much as I hated that perk's existence wasn't free.
When people say free the usually mean undeserved the effort you put in wasn't worth the reward you got from hit or it's very abusable because of the benefits.
So instead of saying abusable or undeserved it's a lot easier to just say free
Once again, it only shows bias. Who gets to determine if someone put in enough work to receive their desired outcome? Do I get to say the window there gives a free loop to survivors because they didn't have to do anything to receive it? The bubba forcing a survivor into a deadzone where he knows there's no pallets (dumb map RNG) got a free down. In every single case that some1 uses free u can argue that no it's not free but they always stick to the free idea because that's their opinion and they'll cudgel you with it (manner of speaking).