Voodoo_Thirsty
Voodoo_Thirsty
About
- Username
- Voodoo_Thirsty
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Pukenplag said:
@Voodoo_Thirsty the funniest part is how you ENTIRELY assume the OP showed the game to their cousin. What if the cousin was on the same room or next room playing and the OP found them having the seizure?
Also, there is no reason to blame the cousin or the OP in this case. It doesn't help resolving the issue. As long as the game doesn't need flashing lights to function, why not remove them so photosensitive people can play?
Because Pukenplag, an epileptic seizure doesn't happen when the screen is too far away.
This was the same case with the Pokemon episode where the kids were literally right in front of the television. After the incident, Japanese televisions started to broadcast to kids "to stay away from the screen".
If you want to deny the scientific fact, then you do you. But having researched this and knowing what the prerequisites are for getting into an epileptic seizure, I can guarantee you that the cousin was very close to the screen.
And I iterate again.
I'm not blaming the cousin. The cousin would not have known what kind of a game DBD was.
I'm blaming the OP, who would've known the nature of the game (being darker) and the very mechanics that came along with it (i.e. flashlight clicking) and having the audacity to come to the forums to blame the survivors and the devs for HIS mistake.
-
@Aneurysm said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2837687#Comment_2837687
This has just turned into an argument over who is to blame in this case. Who is going to be to blame next time it happens? To someone who doesn't have relatives or friends that play this game? A game which has no warnings about this happening anywhere? And in a situation which is basically just used to BM rather than any necessary aspect of gameplay?
@ topic there's no reason for it to be in the game.
I am in every shape and form in favor of implementing an anti-glare mechanic for the flashlights and a proper warning sign to warn others.
BUT
In this instance, the OP was clearly aware of all the possibilities that could've happened with his epileptic cousin, being a long time DBD player. That makes him carry more responsibility than a first-time player.
-
@Majin151 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2837682#Comment_2837682
You showed your true colors with your responses to the op's situation all you been doing is victim blaming especially given reasons why you shouldn't be blaming the op as much as you're doing and tripling down on it
And once again, I deconstructed your unlettered argument and you have nothing to rebut it except for "you're this" and "you're that".
You know what? this is getting too childish for my taste.
Go have you win and have fun with it. lol
-
@Majin151 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2837671#Comment_2837671
Heck even pokemon caused seizures with electric soldier porygon but did you see anyone blame the relatives of the victims nope
WHAT???? are you seriously bringing THAT example up?
Okay, let's take things one by one and compare the two instances.
A) The parents had NO idea that the episode would have ANY elements that could cause an epilepsy.
B) The OP is a long time DBD player who knew of the existence of flashlights and their capabilities.
A) The kids were far too young to know if they had epilepsy or not.
B) The OP clearly states that he KNEW his cousin had epilepsy and carried on playing regardless.
A) The parents were unaware of the situation that was happening when the seizures happened.
B) The OP was literally next to the cousin (since it's scientifically impossible otherwise) when all this was going on.
How can you even bring up this irrelevant, not to mention stupid argument just to prove an insignificant point?
-
@Majin151 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2837673#Comment_2837673
Nah I can go on but there's no point now you basically outted yourself as a ######### person who would rather victim blame than having empathy
Also it's not a ad hominem to point out how you showed your true colors and how terrible they are
Instead of actually deconstructing and explaining why my logic is wrong, you comment on my "true colors" being terrible. That is an ad hominem. In fact, that's a perfect example of it. 🤣
And let me remind you, my stance has always been the same. My criticism towards the OP regarding his actions has been consistent throughout this thread, so I don't understand what "true colors" I'm showing.
Weird... but go figure.
-
@Majin151 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2837666#Comment_2837666
Nice for you to show your terrible colors
Going for ad hominems now after running out of logic?
Lol, k.
-
@Majin151 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2837638#Comment_2837638
They're also advised to stay away from television and certain movies as well but does that stop people with epilepsy from doing so
Then like I said, they get no sympathy out from me.
If I can't swim and I know it but still decide to go into deep waters, I should take the L, not the pool owner.
-
@Majin151 said:
Also their cousin could've been watching without the op knowing(heck I did that when I was a little kid while watching my cousin play gta vice city)
Spare me the could'ves and what if's.
Epileptic seizures don't happen to things that are happening far away. The cousin must've been super close (near OP's closeness to the screen) which would definitely alert the OP of his presence.
-
@Majin151 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2837645#Comment_2837645
Encountering macro users in dbd is really rare(unless it's cheaters) i have only found 2 outside of matches that had cheaters in it also the game has no epilepsy warning
I just don't get why you're being so hostile towards him for being angry at the situation
Because HE put his cousin in this predicament in the first place.
Because HE blamed the survivors and BHVR who couldn't have known that his cousin was epileptic.
Because HE decided to blame others instead of blaming himself for his misjudgement.
and like I said to another forum user:
"The cousin could've had a stroke and even died! These things piss me the hell off, since it was completely avoidable if the OP had common sense from the beginning."
-
@Majin151 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2837630#Comment_2837630
Not really arguing just pointing out how insensitive you're being also dbd isn't that bad for a young kid to watch someone else play compared to something like gta and cod
and you know the latter has a reputation for two things the toxic chat and the kid playerbase
I'M being insensitive? what? for having common sense?
Instead of owning up to his mistakes, the OP decided to come on to the forums and start an entirely new discussion while writing:
"My cousin suffers from epilepsy and those ######### survivors gave my cousin an extreme seizure. Foam came out of his mouth and it scared the living crap out of me. Can we do something about this, BHVR, or is it too much to ask for a solution? Because you nearly killed him."
Blaming the survivors and BHVR for his dumb mistake.
Please, I get that you're trying to be sympathetic here, but in this instance I can't seem to find any for this guy. Sorry.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2837519#Comment_2837519
The issue is this type of stimulation can cause people to have seizures who have no history of epilepsy or even have had a seizure before. I don't know how common it is.
I do acknowledge in this situation the OP did state that their cousin does have epilepsy.
People with epilepsy are advised to stay away from video games as much as possible.
Why on earth was his cousin (who we now know was known to have epilepsy) watching a horror game that tends to be darker than other games with flashlights being a core part of the gameplay? and with him (the OP) KNOWING this fact?
It's just baffling to me.
-
@Majin151 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2837612#Comment_2837612
Funny how you assume they made them play it automatically it instead of you know them watching them play it or the most likely scenario asked if they can play also this could've been the cousins first epileptic episode ever so the op would've had no reason to worry about a epileptic episode
So let me get this straight:
A) The cousin didn't know whether or not he was epileptic, which would mean he would've been quite young since most photosensitive people know their predicament when they're in their early teens. That would make the OP even worse since DBD is for 18 and over.
B) Don't assume that the cousin was forced to play DBD. Fine, but the OP was clearly aware of his presence and must've known the cousin was there watching him play. Under the assumption that he did not know his underage cousin was epileptic, he continued to play a violent game that literally was meant for adults who do not have any problems with flashing lights next to someone who was the opposite of both prerequisites.
Uh huh, what a convincing argument you have.
-
@Chadku said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2837501#Comment_2837501
It always warms my heart to see victim blaming.
Lol, calling the OP an irresponsible family member for making their cousin get into a seizure is victim blaming?
Go open up a dictionary and see what it really means buddy.
-
@JonahsTablet said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2837563#Comment_2837563
Wraith is not B tier, I don't know if you've ever played as him after COH was added, but tunneling/camping is basically a requirement to play him at mid to high MMR.
Well, whatever stance you stand regarding Wraith and his power, there are still many killers who are underperfoming than Wraith so I think his buffs can wait.
-
He's a solid B. What more do you want?
You're asking for a buff to a pretty decent killer when others like Deathslinger, Legion, Trickster and Ghostface are still classified as C tier at best.
-
@drsoontm said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2837508#Comment_2837508
Letting someone with epileptic issues play a game where this can happen may indeed not be the best life decision.
But the gist I get from the OP is basically asking to BHVR to make it so the flashlight cannot be used as a stroboscope.
They could make it so a flashlight cannot be clicked more than twice per second, and break it if the server detects more than that (because some cheater will probably try this).
A better way would be for the client part of the game to simply not allow this to happen even if some survivor is clicking 60 times per second.
Not the best life decision?!
The cousin could've had a stroke and even died! These things piss me the hell off, since it was completely avoidable if the OP had common sense from the beginning.
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2837508#Comment_2837508
Yeah, they should have known better. I already agreed with you here.
but warnings would still be appropriate even if the health issues aren’t as severe as seizures in general cases.
I'm not arguing with you on warning signs. I want them too. But what I'm iterating is that DBD is always going to be bad for those who are photosensitive. So as a responsible human being, keep people away from these types of games as much as possible if they suffer from it.
Those people shouldn't even be anywhere near a game like DBD.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2837501#Comment_2837501
I am with you that the person should have informed themselves.
But the game does have other issues for photosensitive people/people with epilepsy outside of flashlight macros/fast clicking, eg Doctor or some lights on Springwood I think. Those may not be as severe or affect as many people but it’s still an existing issue.
But something as minimal as the Doctor's electrics or lighting in some maps should not cause anything too severe even if you have photosensitive/epileptic people. And if you say it could then those people should stay away from video games to begin with.
What I'm criticizing is that the OP is blaming the game/players for macro flashlight clicking when he/she KNEW that such things were to happen regardless of whether or not the game had a warning sign.
He/she should've known better.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2837490#Comment_2837490
The game should take greater precautions. If they can't fix the issue they should at least do the bare minimum and provide a warning somewhere. But there isn't one- not in-game, not the Steam profile, not on Switch boxart, nowhere. They should take some responsibility too.
The game does not inherently have epileptic tendencies to begin with. It's what the players do that causes it. It's not the game's fault for what players do.
Same goes to the OP, a player that should know that DBD CAN cause epileptic seizures due to the nature of having toggleable flashlights. Unless the OP was a newbie that didn't even know the existence/function of a flashlight, he/she should NOT have brought an epileptic family member to play a game where such outcomes could happen.
That's the OP's fault, not BHVR's.
-
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.
-
@hailxsatanxeveryxday said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2836076#Comment_2836076
I don't know how I missed this when I wrote my OG comment, but how many Dracula films have you actually watched? Being mainstream is a requirement for being licensed into DBD, and your argument falls apart considering how cartoonish Freddy's portrayal got in his later films.
I don't think anybody takes any of the killers in this game "seriously", but Dracula is genuinely creepy in the right hands. If we have a vampire, it should be him.
Trickster is awful. Horrible. And the hate for him has much less to do with his nationality than his overall aesthetic. If he was a DBD version of Justin Bieber, we'd hate him every bit as much, but the anime-style stuff with him definitely didn't help his case. If you can take a K-pop singer in a horror video game seriously, but not Dracula, I don't even know what to say.
Woah, okay there. Take it down a notch.
First, I agreed with OP on briniging a vampire to DBD without it specifically being Dracula. The name "Dracula" just doesn't bring the horror anymore in 2022. The name brings no value nor promotional marketing incentives to name a vampire that way since it lost it's true meaning decades ago. You keep iterating that the Freddy is the same case, but people actually remember when Freddy was genuinely terrifying. People from 1984 are still around you know and even though Freddy did get kind of goofy (alongside Pinhead, Leatherface and etc) in the later installments, he's the only character that does what he does in the movie industry. What other character wields a handmade finger knives that haunts kids dreams in their nightmares? Instead, let's come back to the actual subject. How many characters go around sucking blood and wearing a big cape? Too many. There is a reason why there are no more Dracula films nowadays. He just don't scare people.
Remember, this isn't the 1920's anymore. Even Jeepers Creepers looks scarier and fitting for DBD.
You clearly seem to be infatuated with Dracula being in DBD, but that's on you and if you can take a blood sucking, parasitic fictional middle aged man with long teeth seriously, you can probably take a K-Pop star that killed dozens of people for his own amusement and art seriously too. Just sayin'.
-
@HaunterofShadows said:
Not particularly. I rarely see starstruck, rancor, or Devour Hope. NOED I say some killers rely on too much just like some survivors rely too much on Dead Hard. Haunted Grounds I see more often then the first 3 perks but I wouldn't say killer's rely on it. Plus this would be similar to saying people rely too much on exhaustion.
But remember, this is a status we're talking about here. Not perks. I only listed the first few as perks since it's the most identifiable.
I put etc to include other addons and specific mechanics that allow exposed.
-
@MonsterInMyMind said:
I mean it's the same reason Survivors rely on Exhaustion perks it's because they're good while Exhaustion allows you pretty much longer chases. Exposed on the other hand allows the Killer shorter chase times so yes Killers do use these perks just like Survivors use Exhaustion to make chases longer it's literally the same idea longer/shorter chase times.
See, I NEVER use exhaustion perks but it still doesn't compare to the exposed status.
Exhaustion status is a negative side effect that needs to be remedied by standing still or not running. Exposed lingers until a Hex is destroyed or time eventually runs out.
-
@GreyBigfoot said:
It's okay, you can just say you dislike NoED.
NOED is only a small part of this phenomenon.
-
@Kolozzoni said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2835573#Comment_2835573
A sadistic killer who burned his friends alive, killed strangers for no reason and has recorded his victims' agonizing screams to add to his "art" doesn't sound horrifying to you? or are you just a K-Pop hater who sees nothing about the Trickster beyond that shallow viewpoint?
Dracula is corny as hell. I'd much have Nosferatu (yes, the original German film) than Dracula simply because it's iconic, not to mention genuinely scary (moving through shadows and stuff).
What's Dracula going to do? Turn into a bat, suck the survivors' blood and walk around with a stupid cape? Get real.
I think the OP meant to say "Vampire' and not dracula. Dracula is too mainstreamed to the point he looks goofy in some films. Nobody takes him seriously anymore. Now a vampiric killer for DBD would be awesome. Maybe a cult member or something that believes in sucking/harvesting blood in the middle ages or smth.
But I do agree with the Trickster. He's so much more than just a K-pop singer and a pretty boy. He's an ACTUAL killer you could meet on the streets. They did his lore well too. I don't get why he's hated for being a Korean star. If it was just normal American pop star, he'd receive less hate I bet.
-
@OneGoodBoyDemo said:
considering how the devs treat her, she gets a skin on every patch and almost every rift.
David will get his second tome, while other survivors remain in the shadows like adam, jeff and zarina
i bet that when jeff's turn comes, it will probably be a recolor of a skin he has, since almost all of them are identical. 😂
Poor jeff mains.
Feng is a finicky character to a make lore for since she's Chinese and the country itself condemns any superstitious/horror related to its public in media.
This is the same reason why the Doctor (who's intended to be Chinese doctor and even had a Chinese name during Beta testing) was forced to change ethnicity in fear of China's retaliation.
If they were to make something for her, lorewise, it'll have to be super non-horror related or just plain boring, shallow storytelling. None of which BHVR is willing to do.
-
@DatFastBoi said:
Survivors are skins you can’t just disable them
Do you think I don't know that after playing the game over a thousand hours?
It's just a discussion of preference.
-
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
Demogorgon - Weak
Straight up wrong.
Licensed Killers usually (Nemesis aside) have to stay close to the source material, which is why most of them aren't that good
Just because you're good at the killer doesn't mean the killer itself is stronger than projected.
I bet Onis and Plagues have better general stats than Demo and I consider them to be very meh.
-
@egg_ said:
I don't think PH is meh. He's quite ok imho
He's no Spirit/Nurse/Blight level good.
-
They can buff her however they please... but she still looks goofy.
-
They wouldn't want that becuz there won't be any money involved. We want quality of life changes, something that doesn't bring money to the BHVR table.
Another problem is that they'd have to introduce multiple chapters at once for us to choose from, meaning they can't save any of them for future hype trains since we'd already know what's in store for us.
-
@deKlaw_04 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2827429#Comment_2827429
Also rip Hawkins lmao
Wasn't the biggest fan of Hawkins but yes, losing a map is a heavy blow for us these days.
-
@deKlaw_04 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2827415#Comment_2827415
I’m actually happy I got that on video. I was out of my seat watching that props to her for going for it. I was gonna message her but different platform. I have had games where I have the mentality of “I’m gonna die but I’m gonna get you out”. And I only said ignore him because I thought the convo was getting heated . My mistake for that. Should have said something like “drop it instead”
I don't get easily vexed on the internet, simply because those people are nobodies and I have a lower chance of meeting them in person than winning the lottery at a local convenience store. I'm as cool as the ocean~
All I wanted was for people to actually know when and what words to use to describe a certain situation. What that Kate did was commendable, what I did (not trying to boast) should also be something others should strive for, but trying to undermine these actions by using a falsely applied term called "greed" is simply wrong.
Sure, the whole ordeal is high risk-high reward with very little to no value in return for us, but what's the point in playing an online multiplayer game when we're not going to work as a team til the very end?
Sadly, killer mains can't resonate with us in this department...
-
@deKlaw_04 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2827350#Comment_2827350
I’ll give you this, I should have clarified. What I meant was being hooked last and then having all 3 teammates just leave immediately. That’s what I meant. That’s not what obviously happened in this scenario with just 2 people. I had a game vs Myers and no one wanted to go for the save in the basement so I went in. I get grabbed and hooked next to ash. I use my deliverance and get him off but I go down again. As soon as that happens David who was on the other side of the map just left. Quinten stayed to watch and then left with the ash. I could have made it out but oh well. But if you think you can go for the save last minute then hey go for it. I have seen it work with 2 people. Skip to 9:07
And you can call me what whatever you want I don’t care😂 hope your having a nice day tho
I bet some people will watch that video and claim that Kate was "greeding".
Next time someone risks their lives to save these individuals in real life, they'll probably look back at the person and say "don't greed, buddy". ROFL
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2827094#Comment_2827094
It's not terrible logic, it's how English works and how things get added to the dictionary in the first place. If enough people within a group use a word to mean something, then that's an acceptable use of the word, and no matter how much people will insist that it shouldn't be used this way. And enough DBD streamers and players will use greed to stand in for risk-taking that it's an understood term within the DBD player base. Will it spread to other games? Did it start in another game? I don't know or really care, but it is what it is.
The point I'm making is that this is a change that has already happened, there's no point fighting it to try and stop linguistic drift. It's going to happen no matter how insistent you are that it's the wrong use of the word. That's what they meant, enough players know what it means that it's not exactly uncommon, if someone says you made a greedy play or whatever in future you know what they mean.
"That's how English works"... You mean that's how LANGUAGE works. Of course things change over time including definitions of certain words but I'm not arguing about the phenomenon here.
CAUSATION not correlation.People just sound stupid that's all. It's like the word "#########". People used it wrong and now it's taboo to even use it. Same logic goes for toxic and now greedy. SMH.
@AJStyIez said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2827162#Comment_2827162
"Greeding is any time a player makes a sub-optimal decision for the sake of getting a neglectable set of extra points, being flashy or just for the sake of being bold regardless of the risk it comes with" - Please prove or explain how this is incorrect, I'll wait
You guys are really on a video-game forum using semantics and the technicalities in textbook definitions just to prove a moot point instead of accep
ting that greeding has been around in DBD for years. It doesn't matter what you 'feel', it doesn't change the fact that it's currently the term used to describe the OP's play. You guys are really trying to debate this as the best content creators, tournament players, hundreds of average players use it publicly on a daily basis. Refer to the timestamps below to see how its not new
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/89XAA1HZF5SC/img-5315.jpg
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/THHLJIPLO6Y1/img-5316.jpg
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2827147#Comment_2827147
For people like you and the OP that talk about others being rude, biased or projecting subjective thoughts you sure do always come off as a hypocrite in the few threads I've seen you going back and forth with people in 😂 'Ignore him, anybody that doesn't think exactly like me and play the same style as me is an idiot for leaving' when in reality that's the smartest decision you can make if you're trying to win. I bet if we called you idiots for forcing a save and then dying that would be called immature though
"For people like you and the OP that talk about others being rude, biased or projecting subjective thoughts you sure do always come off as a hypocrite"
When have I ever ridiculed or was rude to someone for not agreeing with me? I literally said we'll agree to disagree on this very topic.
"Greeding is any time a player makes a sub-optimal decision for the sake of getting a neglectable set of extra points, being flashy or just for the sake of being bold regardless of the risk it comes with."
That is neither the definition nor is it even an actual word for that matter regarding the word "greeding". That seems like a newly coined term for DBD players. And by the by, I was not "mak[ing] a sub-optimal decision for the sake of getting a neglectable set of extra points" nor was I "being flashy or just for the sake of being bold regardless of the risk it comes with".
I don't get what's so difficult for you to understand.
Here's a definition of the word "altruistic"
"Showing a disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others; unselfish."
Maybe this will clear your mind a little.
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2826984#Comment_2826984
I'm not using any words, I'm just pointing out how other people are already using them, and you're not going to get anywhere by railing against inaccurate terminology.
Literally your entire thread is based around this idea that we need to use the dictionary definition of greed and if we do then you can't have been greedy, so look at how this doesn't make sense.
Or we can use the weird colloquial DBD meaning, which means the Killer's kind of a jerk but there's nothing confusing going on.
That's an absolutely terrible logic.
If 99.9% of the population use the word "greedy" as a means to gain selfish advantage in any cost, it's never wrong to point out that the word should be used for its intended purpose. Just because the remaining 0.1% of the DBD community uses it uniquely doesn't give them a pass for using the wrong term that means something completely different.
It's like calling you, RainehDaze, a piece of s but sugarcoating it as "oh, I don't mean it as a bad thing". It logically doesn't make any sense. Following your logic, everybody should respect what word we say and how we mean it since it's what the speaker "intends" to say right?
Well in that case... Everyone is gutter trash that deserves to rot in the deepest part of hell with all your parents and children along with you. Oh! But don't take it literally, I meant it in a good way! You see how weird it sounds?
-
@AJStyIez said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2826990#Comment_2826990
Nahh I'm pretty confident that I did, there's a reason it was upvoted 5 times and nobody else besides you is questioning me about how altruism at the wrong times is considered greedy. If it was solely about the killer's attitude here then you wouldn't be trying to debate something that the community around you agrees with despite a handful of people claiming its wrong
I already said the killer was an #########, all I said besides that was that it's considered a greedy play by a lot of people to force a save when it can get others killed especially when you have a free win right in front of you. I do it all the time myself, it is what it is. I'm willing to bet a poll would support my stance too on whether or not altruism at the wrong times is greedy. Remember greeding is 'subjective' though the next time your teammate farms you off the hook with no BT and you die immediately afterwards because they don't think its a bad play
Lol, I think my total upvote heavily outweighs your own, but instead of jousting whether who has the bigger upvote schlong, how about we acknowledge that we'll never see eye to eye on this situation?
There's a reason why lots of people agree with me and lots agree with you, but at the end of the day, we each play our own games. You seem to be in line with the killer/streamer I met that match and I seem to be an altruistic survivor who may seem like a greedy player in some killer's eyes.
Though I heavily am against using that certain term that carry no resemblance to its intended meaning whatsoever, I'll let it slide as you'll never be able to change my mind as I can't change yours.
-
@AJStyIez said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2826979#Comment_2826979
Translation: I'm going to pull the 'you're biased for Killers card' and tell you what you 'sound' like because you don't agree with me even though you're a Survivor main with 4k hours that was mostly spent on playing Survivor at a reasonably high level
I literally provided objective examples so if you struggle to understand still then that's not on me. Clearly the Killer got you bent out of shape because you're still here taking 'greed' as a personal slight to your character when in reality even if they were being an ######### to you they still had a point. Did they have to tell you you messed up and what you should've done? No, but did the Killer lie? No
You secured a free win for yourself and the team, you denied said free win to go across the map for a save with way more risk than reward so you got punished and the Killer got a tie out of it. If you don't care about winning and rather save people that's fine and Iclearly said I'm not judging you for that, I simply explained what greeding is and how its looked at as a greedy play
LMFAO, the very attitude of your statement speaks more volume than your words alone.
You say you provided objective examples? I don't think so. You may THINK you did, but you haven't. That's why I'm struggling here. Your examples are subjective and pretty unlettered if you ask me.
The killer's message is not a problem. I know my mistakes as any responsible players should and I own up to it. The killer had no business whatsoever to lecture regarding my actions though. It was not his place.
THAT's what I was criticizing. Not that the killer was right or wrong.
It was always about his attitude, sweetie. Maybe you missed that.
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2826457#Comment_2826457
Sorry, English is descriptive, not prescriptive. If DBD players use greedy to mean making overly-risky plays for an extra pallet or an extra save or finishing a gen, then that's a valid meaning. :T
Any language is descriptive in that manner. The word "gay" meant "joyful and happy" before and now it means something completely different.
But in this case, you're literally changing the meaning of the word, not adding a definition which mean the people who're using it are using it wrong.
And like you said, if "overly risky plays & lack of caution" is the main context for using the word "greedy" then you're better off with words such as "reckless" which literally means the very context.
So instead of using the wrong terminology over and over again, why don't you start using the correct word that was made for situations like this? Saves all of us time and our last two brain cells we have left.
-
@AJStyIez said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2826679#Comment_2826679
And besides debating a moot point like the OP what exactly is your case? You're really going to sit here and argue that greeding isn't a thing? 😂
"Greeding" is completely subjective.
Your point in and of itself is pretty moot since you project a subjective stance on the matter and can't provide any objective narrative that substantiates that an act of altruism is considered "greedy".
You sound like a very opinionated person already and it is no surprise you side more with the killers than altruistic survivors and can't resonate with us for sharing such values.
There's no point in conversing with people like you who hold no common ground. sorry.
-
@GodDamn_Angela said:
It's always been considered "Greedy". Especially if it is unsafe and you get the unhooked Survivor killed for it, not just at the endgame, but throughout the game. I honestly don't know many survivor mains who would argue that it isn't.
I dunno if it really started with WGLF, but it definitely one of the reasons why unsafe unhooks are seen as Greedy.
The Killer is a jerk though and shouldn't have said anything. lol
You see, I think people are using the word wrong or don't know the actual meaning behind the word itself.
I think the word they're looking for is "reckless" or smth along the lines on that, but definitely not "greedy". Unless I was farming BP, an altruistic save isn't "greedy" as there's nothing going for me personally.
I use WGLF for protection hits, cuz if I'm going to play altruistically anyway might as well get some BP out of it. But my main priority is not to farm, it's to play like an actual team. That's why I never use selfish perks like Dead Hard or Decisive Strike, perks that revolve around me and my playstyle.
-
@Gamedozer7 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2826406#Comment_2826406
I'm just saying. I did seem like you took accountability and idk what the killer was so mad about as a killer I love when survivors get greedy like that it normally works in my favor.
Maybe he had a bad day or smth.
But he was a streamer and he had that attitude in his past streams, so... welp, go figure...
-
@Kurri said:
Btw, absolutely hate those loadouts lol like jeez 🤣 poor killers
Tell me about it lol.
I go without addons/items all the time so I'm no threat, but I do feel for killers sometimes. Those builds are brutal.
-
@Kolozzoni said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2826273#Comment_2826273
I feel like some killers need to grow up and actually act like human beings with some social cognizance for once.
Seriously, some killers give out real anti-social vibes sometimes. Survivors seem like A-holes, but killers? Anti-social AF.
The killer was a streamer and I did hear his voice in one of his videos and yes... sad to tell but he did seem like a pretty anti-social and opinionated person in general.
I wish a few of them went outside and meet some actual people. Then they'll learn that being extra preachy wins you no allies.
-
@AsherFrost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2826414#Comment_2826414
That's why I said he was a whiner who made me happy to be a console scrub 😉
Well at least we can agree on that part hahaha 😆
-
@tesla said:
Love how he mocks BW but he brings it anyway and yet being entitled about how you should play. I guess some people just don't understand the nuances of this game. Like sometimes you should 99 the door, sometimes you should open it to ensure no one gets downed near the exit, sometimes you should wait for teammates at the gate to help them, sometimes you should leave to give them a hatch chance and even taking a good decision does not ensure the best outcome. It's also impossible to play perfectly all the time as we are all just humans. Best not to be so judgemental about people's playstyles.
That's the whole reason why I just said "lol gg" instead of playing the blame game.
For a split second at the exit gate, I knew I could go for the save (albeit it being VERY risky) or just escape and leave her to die. I chose to go for it even though I knew I would not make it out alive (EGC was almost over you see). I took the chance and owned up to the outcome.
I just wish killers would just be happy with their wins and not preach/lecture us about how and what we should've done. That hindsight BS is not helpful since I know what situation I was in.
-
@AsherFrost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2826399#Comment_2826399
Right, but you can see how someone who isn't privy to your thoughts wouldn't be able to tell the difference, right?
Right. But still remaining to be a preachy arse even after reading my two cents on the situation also makes him a nosy individual, right?
Right.
-
@Gamedozer7 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2826266#Comment_2826266
You could either get out Scott free no danger or go back in and take a chance at losing it all. It is greedy.
Now with that been said as long as you expect that it was your fault for dieing then I see no issue. I will go in and try to save that survivor that bubba is facecamping after we finish the gens because I want to and when I die oh well I did it myself.
If I didn't know that it was my fault for taking the risk, I would've flamed the Meg or the Killer, but I knew and laughed it off. I didn't tell Meg that it was her fault, point the blame at the Killer for using the perk, all I said was "lol gg".
The killer was the one who went on a rampage about "you should've done this" & "you should've done that" and got all preachy about the whole outcome, accusing us of BMing and being greedy.
That is something I will not stand by.
-
@AsherFrost said:
Two things
1st. That killer is a whiner. I don't get why people want to lecture others at the end of match, but it makes me happy to be a console scrub.
2. I totally get how you see it as just altruistic, but for myself, if I can leave and I try for the last minute save like that? It's because I want to try and get a few more BP, if possible, which is totally greedy. Sometimes greed is good and leads to fun end game moments, sometimes you just end up hit by BW or noed and end up paying for not leaving when you could, but that's the game.
Well, your second point IS greed since YOU wanted the BP for yourself.
My example had nothing going for me so it's a little different than your situation I'm afraid...
-
@AJStyIez said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2826266#Comment_2826266
The point eludes you then even when the Killer and I just explained it to you. You're looking way too deep at this.. Greeding is any time a player makes a sub-optimal decision for the sake of getting a neglectable set of extra points, being flashy or just for the sake of being bold regardless of the risk it comes with. It doesn't make you a bad person or a bad teammate either but its as simple as that. Altruism even by other Survivors has always been looked at as greedy in the wrong scenarios for a long time
Example of Greed: You're running a killer with 5 gens remaining and you go down unnecessarily early because you wanted to loop the safe pallet an extra 2 times which led to a bloodlust...that's greeding a pallet. If you just threw it down as you normally would you would be safe and probably alter the outcome of the game, instead the killer now has a fast first hook and can go pressure your teammates
Example 2 of Greed: A killer slugs a survivor with unbreakable/medkit to go attempt a down on the last survivor thats across the map. Survivor #1 gets up and opens the gate and then takes a protection hit to save the other person. The killer greeded and gets punished for chasing the 4k instead of securing the 3rd kill first
You willingly turned a 1k loss for the killer into a tie because you wanted to force a save across the map with little to no time left and also ignored the risk of BW... you went out of your way in a lose/lose scenario when you already had the W. I do it myself sometimes so I'm not judging you I'm just letting you know what people consider that
TL;DR: Killers view it as greed. Survivors view it as altruistic. Got it.
@[Deleted User] said:
Strange definition for “greed”. At least I know now if someone accuses me of it.
I would have done the same. It’s not about the BPs. I just play altruistic.
I don't think anybody uses that word in that context. When we say "greed" it usually has something in it for me. Being altruistic has nothing going for me except trying to be a good team player. But... who cares right?
-
@burt0r said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2826277#Comment_2826277
I was just playing the "whataboutism card".
I don't really care for either but it is the goal of the killer to kill so i don't think they are greedy at any point even with the 3rd man slug to find the fourth and neither are the (up to 3) healthy survivor trying to prevent the kill.
Well... that's my point exactly. Everything the killers do is for their own self. Survivors also have individualistic objectives, but we also have a thing called "teamwork" and "altruism" something killers can't share, unfortunately.
So your example about killers securing kills is very different, not to mention unrelated to the point I made. The two roles are simply incompatible for comparisons.