Volkfang
Volkfang
About
- Username
- Volkfang
- Joined
- Visits
- 39
- Last Active
Comments
-
"No, this discussion is pretty old and has been on these forums several times over. You've really only brought more verbiage to the same old point: "Just buff killers more and we'll totally tunnel a bit less, perhaps"."
Well I can see your not open to a differing view on the subject, and since you've stooped to strawmanning in what was otherwise I thought a productive back and forth I see little reason to continue this discussion. Your point of view definitely comes across as heavily sided to one side of the player base and I fear that that mono directional view will be the downfall of this game.
-
"Neither of these are applicable analogies though, as the problem I have with your argument is specifically in the one thing looter shooters and MMOs don't have to deal with. DBD is PvP, the game styles you mentioned, are not."
It wasn't meant to be a 1 for 1 comparison. The purpose of that comparison was to illustrate the presence and success of carrot style game design across games as a whole.
"Even in the cases you mention of PvP games, the carrots you mention are also already in the game. They won't do anything to incentivise non-tunnelling strategies. In fact, they do quite the opposite. They reward tunnellers more than they reward non-tunnellers."
Yes, the carrots are in the game and they work. That was my point. Incentive based game design is as fundamental to games as is rigging 3D models and backend code. Also, I don't understand what CoD and CS have to do with tunneling. But this highlights the whole reason I referenced games outside of DBD, people get caught up on one specific example and lose sight of the broader point being made.
"Unfortunately, you are, implicitly. What you are suggesting isn't feasible without raising the issue I bring up. Whatever method to achieve a win you want to implement or boost to compete with tunnelling will have to be more effective, and lower effort."
The difference again here is your focusing in on one specific instance. My thought process is more wholistic, if implementing a carrot/stick game mechanic were to result in a buff to killers than they would be nerfed to be brought in line elsewhere and vice versa. This is almost implied in the term "game balancing"
"I appreciate that, but at that point you are diverging from any practical application of your feedback. BHVR can't do anything with feedback that only works within a purely hypothetical setting. I'm not trying to sound dismissive here, but game design is only useful insofar that it can be applied."
The thought process behind actions can be equally if not more important than the actions themselves. The forums and reddit is already full of "practical" suggestions of Nerf this or Buff that. And the devs have pretty well demonstrated that they nerf and buff based very heavily off of what %s and #s they're seeing. I'm sure they take community feedback into account too, but It seems like it has to reach a critical mass kind of level of outcry to be the main motivator for the change. See the Blight addons as an example.
What I don't see alot of feedback on is next level order of thinking. Providing feedback on vision and philosophy for the game can be just as useful tools because it can make you pause and look at problems from different angles opening new solutions that wouldn't have been seen before.
It can be easy to get stuck in a cycle of playing whack a mole with problems and tempting to just solve solutions with a hammer (or nerf bat) . In my opinion the truly great games are the ones that find creative and elegant solutions to problems, using them as opportunities to enhance all of the players experience.
-
@Firellius I think we're talking past each other, so let me try and restate what I think our positions are.
My position in one sentence: Positive Reinforcement/Carrot/Reward (whatever you want to call it) design is an integral part of good game design and I'm concerned the devs are losing sight of that.
To support my claim I'll give examples outside of DBD, look at looter shooters and MMOs. Players tackle hard and challenging content to receive rewards, like raiding in WoW or Destiny 2. That's carrot incentive. In competitive games like CoD or CS, players are rewarded with the victory screen at the end usually accompanied with other rewards like XP, skins, ladder ranking etc. all of those rewards are incentives. Heck, everything even down to shiny particle effects and victory music are designed to give you that positive feedback/carrot effect. Of course for competitive players the biggest carrot is outside the game, just the satisfaction that comes from winning based on your mastery of the game. (However, outside factors are less important in this discussion because game design can't control all player desire. So discussing what to do about the small % of mememr's, cheaters, malicious players, RPers, etc. doesn't really factor.) In short, "Carrots" are just a fact of game design.
What I believe to be your position: Carrots don't work because In order to provide a big enough incentive to counter the best player strategies that players work out themselves you would have to give massive buffs breaking the game.
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that when you say carrots don't work your referring to specific application of carrots such as camping and tunneling. Because as I already stated carrots already exist in every game and can be some of the best parts of gaming.
My counter to what I believe your position to be, 1st your assuming that I'm calling for a massive buff to killers, which I'm not. I believe you're underestimating how much you can alter player behavior by offering alternatives. The reason I brought up Devour Hope was to illustrate this. I'm not talking about it as the be all end all solution to tunneling, but killers who run it definitely alter their play style to gain it's benefit. So expound on that philosophy. And you don't have to make killers super overpowered in the process, just make the alternative at the same level of effectiveness as the tunneling strat. Note I'm not offering an example of how to do this for a couple reasons. Mainly I want to stay on the topic of game design philosophy. Instead of getting bogged down into why this or that idea doesn't work for tunneling, camping, 3 gen etc.
Finally, I wanted to address the fact that you brought up the statistics. I know they're all we have to go on, but they're awful. I wouldn't base any arguments based off the kill rate statistics BHVR provides. Otherwise Nurse will be getting giga buffed every patch until the heat death of the universe. Also it'd be incredibly easy for BHVR to manipulate them. They've said they want killers to have a kill rate of 60% (which imo kills shouldn't be the objective here, but thats another discussion) to achieve that all you have to do is turn the knob on gen timers and/or killer interaction times. All killers in the 60 million player community getting to many kills? turn the knob lowering them xS/0.xS Killers not getting enough? turn the knob the other way. What does that actually do for game balance and how the game feels? zip.
-
I think @Aven_Fallen raises a good point, if the incentive allows you to have your cake and eat it too then it's not a carrot, it's just a buff. So any design that addresses a gameplay pain point should take that into consideration. They've shown the ability to do that though with the changes to Ruin and NOED, so I don't see why they couldn't make them same progress with say Pain Res. Have it deactivate after one survivor dies but enable all hooks to activate it.
@Firellius As for Devour Hope having a low pick rate, that's kind of missing the point. What do you think would happen to it's pick rate if it wasn't a boon and just a normal perk? It'd be #1 for sure. Not saying it should be, that'd be way to OP. But it illustrates that the mechanic itself is solid as a carrot incentive. So it comes down to implementation of the carrot. To dismiss the entire design philosophy of incentivized behaviors because you haven't seen the perfect implementation yet is, to borrow your word, myopic.
I think the attitude of throwing in the towel and just needing to tackle problems with a stick mentality will lead to decline in this game. Games are just unfun when you feel like the game is punishing you just for playing it, when that happens people will stop logging in.
-
I agree that all players will naturally adopt strategies that are the easiest and lead to the most success. That's the very reason Metas develop in the first place for example. The question I pose though is this, when those strategies cross the line into becoming a pain point in the gameplay loop, how should they be handled? I argue positive feedback in games is always better than negative when you have the choice.
As an example of Carrot vs Stick, every player likes to see 4 Iri emblems on their screen at the end of a match. This is part of the positive feedback or "carrot". players absolutely alter their gameplay so they get better emblems at the end and thus also get more BP. Now, does this mean that's all players think about and only care about getting iri emblems? Of course not, but it's a small example that the carrot strategy works. If you applied Stick design into the emblem system you would have a punishment built into bad performance, like losing BP for bronze or lower emblems. Obviously that's a terrible idea. I hope this illustrates my thoughts and how even if the anti-X mechanics are OK, they are missed opportunities to improve the game at best.
-
@Firellius said:
"I'm concerned because it seems like the mindset they're adopting to address pain points in the gameplay loop is all stick and no carrot."
Carrots don't work. Killers will gravitate to the easiest, highest return strategy, and will continue to do so. Overpowered strategies (yes, chess merchant was plainly broken) need to be nerfed down, since you can't provide an alternative without breaking the game's balance even further.
Based off of this and other comments I've seen you post, it seems you have this mentality that all killer mains = bad and survivor mains = good. Which is very strange because you need both sides to enjoy playing the game if you want the game to be successful.
That aside, I gave 2 good examples of carrots that work. Pain Res and Devour Hope. If a carrot doesn't work, it doesn't mean carrots don't work at all. It just means it's a bad carrot. See Grim Embrace as an example.
-
@Seanzu said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3597285#Comment_3597285
What is crawl leave and light pt? lmao
Hook destruction is almost a non-issue because you can just bleed someone out if you really have to, you'd have to explain these new made up things, unless crawl leave is... survivors crawling away because you've decided to slug, or do you mean "heal teching" where a survivor heals another survivor as they're crawling out the gate to prevent pick-up? If so, sure let killers override the healing action in the exit gate area.
"Hook destruction is almost a non-issue because you can just bleed someone out if you really have to"
In the context of this discussion I disagree. If we're talking about resolving boring and monotonous areas in gameplay, what's more boring than having to stand over a survivor for 4 minutes because they ran to comp corner after a hook broke? I've also recently had a game where I got a down in the exit gate at endgame and was able to pickup, but because I happened to use the wrong hook earlier in the game it was a free out for the survivor. Not to mention losing your valuable scourge hooks when the survivor decides to kill themselves on hook.
So yes, hooks breaking are very much an issue for killers, and there's really not anything killers can do about it. You literally just pick up and beeline for the closest one and hope it's a scourge if you're running it.
-
@BenSanderson55 said:
"You can play customs if you only want to play with bots. No need to remove the D/C penalty for that." Several well known DBD streamers brought this up right after launch it wasnt just me saying DC should be removed due to bots.
"Also, this mentality will completely kill any future growth." THATS THE SECONDARY GOAL, THE PRIMARY GOAL IS TO GET THEM TO FIX LONG BROKEN MECHANICS, NOT USE BAND-AIDS. Also, my soloq teammates suck so i kill myself on hook, go next is same as I don't need to learn killer just camp, tunnel, slug.
"You're just making up false equivalencies now to try and defend the undefendable." As you completely exaggerate "If someone wants to login into matches just to leave them immediately every time" I'd like to see a person who's left literally EVERY match LOL as you point out my """Killers always slug for the 4K" is just a lie. That happens sometimes, but it's far from being ALL times"" hypocrite
"And when did I suggest removing self unhooks? Did you even read my comments?" How do you know if someone is killing themselves on hook or just trying to kobe "as a strat" (as killer mains like to say), you have no proof as you would have to be a mind reader.
"Other games having penalties with only 5 minutes peak is another lie." I'm glad I havent been pathetic enough to be roped into more than one game with this "something to prove never DC" crap.
Lastly, I say don't become just like the guy who killed himself on hook/DC by being triggered like him. When soloq teammates do it to me I just keep playing, I get it (in soloq) completely unbalanced soloq is very triggering alot of times.
"THATS THE SECONDARY GOAL, THE PRIMARY GOAL IS TO GET THEM TO FIX LONG BROKEN MECHANICS, NOT USE BAND-AIDS."
So you're saying you're fine with the current state of the game and the current community being ruined by unsportsmanlike conduct so you can strong arm the developers into fixing the game to fit your vision of it? Not saying your vision of the game is wrong necessarily, but being a scumbag to your teammates to "teach the devs a lesson" is not the way to advance the health of the game. That's what feedback like this is for.
"Also, my soloq teammates suck so i kill myself on hook, go next is same as I don't need to learn killer just camp, tunnel, slug."
So you advocate for for that style of killer gameplay? Because you've just linked the two yourself
Edit: typo
-
Just my thoughts on the tease, so obviously the knives in order are Trickster, Clown, Myers/Chucky in Silhouette, and Legion.
The fact that Trickster is first and it's already confirmed he's been reworked this chapter makes me think this is a timeline tease more than a killer tease. The silhouette being Myers and being made to stand out to possibly showing he's a major rework (like ground up kind of rework) rather than number tweaks like Trickster.
If this theory is true than the reworks would be Trickster this update, followed by Clown next update, Myers next, and finally Legion.
The chair detail that someone mentioned tho is interesting and could be a clue, or maybe its just art. We'll see tomorrow!
Edit: yep, the 4th blade is Legions not Weskers thanks for the image
-
@jesterkind said:
The part about this not replacing any planned content is the most interesting to me. Considering I doubt any other licenseholder would be okay with their stuff being overshadowed by ST returning, I think it's reasonable to speculate the new killer might also be related to ST?
Just spitballing, ofc.
"Will new Stranger Things content come to the game?
We don’t have any additional Stranger Things content to announce at this time."
Because of that line, I doubt the new killer (this patch anyways) will be Stranger Things/Vecna. If it is, then I don't know why you add the above question into the FAQ. Along the same lines, with all due respect, I'm not sure why the "Why was it removed?" question is there. The answer is just a PR answer that doesn't really give an answer. Of course I understand that these kind of answers have to be worded this way for legal reasons and such and it was probably a private licensing dispute, but my personal preference is just not to have the question. Again, no rudeness intended just my personal feedback. Maybe others feel differently.
Very happy for those who finally get to share in the Stranger Things content, I know there are alot who have been wanting it back. Also very happy for those of us who succumbed to the FOMO last time will still get a full release as well. Cheers!
-
@Nazzzak said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3577072#Comment_3577072
I don't let go on hook but I also don't think people should be punished for doing so because I think it's a symptom of a larger problem. 9/10 times I see team mates let go is when they're being tunnelled. I dgaf about being tunnelled, I'll keep the killer busy easily and my team mates can just sit on gens. So you can argue that someone letting go is letting the team down (or lacking "moral decency") but I also notice that in 9/10 of those instances the tunnelled person was also let down by their team. It's not hard to take a hit for a tunnelled team mate, or attempt to take aggro. I always try but if I'm on the opposite side of the map I hope other team mates will step in and they honestly rarely do.
Maybe if more players worked on being better team mates, then other players will want to continue playing with us. As it stands anyway, I don't see people letting go enough in my games for it to make too big an impact on my enjoyment on the game. But if other people notice it happening alot then maybe those people need to question why other people don't want to play with them. You say it's a team game, yet often your team mates are the ones playing like they're in a single player game with no regard to looking out for each other. And then they expect people to consider them before moving on?
Everyone has there own version of trying there best and different nuance to how they like to play the game. I'm not talking about those people who try their best to win, but then see that "oh it's just me and 1 other survivor and theres 4 gens left. Might as well go next." As long as you try that's great. Whether you're tunneled or not. If you use the excuse of "I don't like the way this killer is playing" or "my teamates are noobs and need to get good" to justify killing yourself on your first hook, then the only games you're going to play out are when you're just completely dunking on the killer.
Also, this mentality will completely kill any future growth. If you get queued up with teammates who are brand new to the game or very low hours and don't know to take hits or split gens or loop properly. Yeah, they're going to suck. We all do when we're new. But instead of making a competitive match out of it and trying to take charge as the experienced player, you just say "oh well, teamates suck. Went down before 1st gen, gonna suicide hook now." Then those new players are going to get slaughtered every game and probably just write off DBD as super imbalanced and never get into it.
As for me as a player, I try to be super gen focused and smart about altruism. Being honest, I suck at looping and try to balance learning better pathing by taking the chase and also knowing when to let better loopers take it to increase my teams odds. I try to play both sides equally. But more than worrying about how my teammates or the killer plays I end every match thinking what can I do to improve. I think that is honestly the thrust of my first post. People should be more introspective about themselves in general.
But hey, it's a video game and I know that's a big ask. But if people are interested enough to read the forums for information and discussion maybe they're interested enough to work on themselves at some point *hope*
-
The people saying "It's just a game why care?" and "why force people to play?" really blow my mind. You're saying why care that much about a game, but you care enough about that game to come to the forums, create an account, and post comments about it. Irony much? It makes me believe these are the people who are causing this problem in the first place.
Every time you join a team or multiplayer game it used to be understood that you had enough moral decency to understand the social contract you were signing up for, otherwise just go play single player games.
I agree with the solution of removing 4%s and second stage skill checks. They don't add enough to the game to warrant the rampant sub 1 minute suicide sprees
-
I haven't played on the PTB, so I appreciate the perspective. I'm glad to hear the flamethrowers don't seem as frustrating as EMPs.
I definitely like the interactions between killer and survivors, dredge and pinhead were mentioned, but even pig, wekser, and nemi all have at least decent killer/survivor interaction. My main point is I don't think the new direction of disabling a killers power (especially if it's their chase power) is healthy for the game.
I understood why old eruption was bad for the game and needed to be changed. A survivor being disabled for 30 seconds and just standing there isn't good gameplay, it's just boring. The same is true for Killer when you have an unreliable power, it's just boring/frustrating to have a chase extended for X amount of seconds because your ability was turned off.
Also just to reiterate, I'm talking more at a high level design kind of space, not specifically saying EMPs or flamethrowers need this change or that nerf. Just that in my opinion killer/survivor interaction was better as a side interaction for survivors rather than an off button for killers.