burt0r
burt0r
About
- Username
- burt0r
- Joined
- Visits
- 11,313
- Last Active
Comments
-
It's funny and ironic that more than half of the suggestions against this unfun playstyle is another unfun playstyle that already gets regularly complained about.
-
@okaayletsgoo said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3629871#Comment_3629871
Cleared the vault and almost on my feet running away, she swung from the side and turned through the window to hit. No it doesn't make sense and it wouldn't make sense regardless of the killer. A straight on lung MAYBE should hit there but from the side? Never.
The killer hit detection is a cone, not a line.
Also:
Cleared the vault and almost on my feet running away
So you know that you didn't even finish the vault completely, when survivor already need zero-point-whatever seconds to get enough distance to clear the basic killer swipe reach that goes through windows.
-
@okaayletsgoo said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3629125#Comment_3629125
If you haven't played in 3 years anything you think or say is completely invalid. Hop off the forums or hop on the game.
Pfft hahahaha
-
@Spare_Them_Mori_Me said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3629062#Comment_3629062
Even so, without it, We are open to your tunneling meta. Currently, the chances of getting a tunneling killer are higher than is safe. So, this combo should continue to exist until BHVR does something to balance for all of us! :D Wouldn't that be the dream?
But regardless, this game isn't catering to SWFs or killers who claim 'But they6 can use it even if I dont' literally have nothing else to gripe about? You're gonna run into it, we're gonna get tunneled. Until one of more finely tuned, the other shall co-exist.
Okay, I normally don't do this but:
Buddy, did you really assume my playstyle there with "your tunneling meta".
Dude, I haven't played this game in the last 3 years.
And I don't know how often I said it on this forum but the 2 years prior to me quitting I played exactly as I described above. No tunneling, no camping and slugging only to avoid killing someone before the 8th hook. It was an experiment to see if survivor show appreciation for this kind of killer going by how much complaints I have seen over the years. (Hint: 80-90% don't.)
I don't really care what survivor run nowadays but saying tunneling is the exclusive reason is a bunch of BS.
-
@okaayletsgoo said:
because every game is either tunnel or slug at 5 gens. Solo q is such a nightmare man. Every single game is either tunneled out in the first couple minutes or slugged and bled out. It's just not fun at all. DS is useless, off the record is cool but most killers can catch right back up to you in a few seconds, ftp buckle up is a good counter but requires someone to be literally following killer around and not doing gens or doors. So many killers have insta down mechanics that I think and insta up is a fair trade. The only thing survivor has going for us right now is gens speeds and that's IF you can get your solo q mates to do gens. 90% of my irridecent rank games (not that it means much these days) is over at 3-4 gens with 4 dead. Not sure how that's considered balanced.
Ah okay, so if I would reinstall DBD and play in my friendly no-tunnel/camp/slug playstyle it wouldn't get used against me at every opportunity?
Suuure...
-
@Hauntales said:
Now and again I would have a great match, teammates are great, killer is great and skilled. And then you could have 1 gen left to finish and you're disconnected out of nowhere. So you lose your bloodpoints you earned and possibly gain a 5 minute ban even though the disconnection was not your fault. I'm curious to know if it's diffiult to determine whether a player disconnects intentionally or unintentionally. If you disconnect on purpose then I understand. But losing out on bloodpoints and gaining a time ban when you were disconnected randomly is a bit of a blow. What do you all think?
It is physically IMPOSSIBLE to differentiate between a loss of connection and an intentional disconnect.
The server at behaviour (and any other game) only ever "sees" the connection going out and nothing else. That is also the reason why the DC penalty can't really be taken out of most pvp games because a manual pulling of the plug looks the same as the Internet provider having problems.
The ONLY exception is if the game itself would crash, have a built in analysis tool that then would send a report to the game server and would at least prevent the DC penalty. Still wouldn't help with the loss of match rewards
Edit: Oh wow, this post is 5 months old. -.-
@rococonot said:
idk if its my internet, but ive been getting unintentionally disconnected for the past week and just yesterday i have a 24hour penalty
Please check before reviving posts that have been dead for months to years.
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3628077#Comment_3628077
Would be nice if ppl utilized hook gymnastics
I never fully understood why they stopped. Probably because too many people used it for too many different meanings.
Some used it as "careful, killer is camping" and other goofes for "killer is gone save me".
There was no universal consent for it's meaning.
Guess I gave myself the answer for, why
-
I think more like it gets bored when the cat and mouse entertainment it sets up for itself grinds to a halt for up to the 60 minutes mark.
Just like when survivor out stealth each other until then and it simply goes "meh, they couldn't catch the prey I prepared for them. Time for another try, this has gotten boring and went on long enough. Restart."
Same with your example, "Hey dude, I know you prevent them from escaping but you will get nowhere this way. Restart."
-
No.
If you don't bodyblock with the off the hook bt endurance, get downed, hooked and THEN cry "tunneling", then everything else in regards to bodyblocks is fine.
But they do feel incredibly frustrating as killer because all the effort they put into two chases can be negated two steps before a hook. Because hook states are the only non reversible progress a killer can make.
-
Okay, I find this quite funny that a game that is based on a whole film genre gets it's own film now.
It's not a new concept but the basic thought of "let's design a game after those movies" to "let's do a a movie about this game that's about these movies" is quite ironic for me. 😁
-
@Astel said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3619952#Comment_3619952
Then what about you show us you achieving the win streaks with any killers.
Let's not be unreasonable. They would need to play killer more than only for dailies and/rift challenges (if they play killer at all)
-
@Superyoshiegg said:
Only in Dead by Daylight will you find people who go "well playing with your friends is cheating actually🤓".
Well, because only in DBD it is a one sided advantage via 3rd party software.
In any symmetrical game both sides have the option for this advantage and in most, if not all other pvp games it is compensated or substituted by built in VC, pings, quick commands or built-in normal chat function.
-
@Atsuka_Anarchy said:
Playing Killer, you’ll oftentimes get someone randomly clicking their flashlight instead of doing a gen during another chase and following us to try a flashlight save or just trying to get the killers attention when they’re clearly in a great position to down another survivor? It’s just wasting time and reassuring the Killer you’re doing nothing productive.
Playing Survivor, you’ll sometimes get a Killer that wants to slug and let everyone bleed out, or just stand over a survivor doing random things instead of picking them up and moving onto the next game? And why just hide throughout the match knowing it’s a lost game?
I mean you can grab a sandwich or DC the game to move on the next match sooner, but the fact is that some games are severely time consuming because of the killers or survivors are doing certain things that make it last insanely longer more than it should.
Subjective revenge for the (probably) bad match before or more generally simple petty attitude.
-
SURVIVOR, I've come to bargain.
-
@GeneralV said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3616973#Comment_3616973
I don't see why it is a problem to save it until the end game. Like, it is a valid strategy to save a powerful tool until the very last second because it is still part of the game.
And I'm honestly seeing A LOT of camping and tunneling recently, far more than I saw in the past. Obviously, it is entirely possible that our experiences are just completely different, but on the Forums there are many complaints that reinforce this fact.
I think it would help a lot. The current DBD needs it.
Well, I would say you have no problem driving the last friendly, non-camping killers into quitting or switching to also camp if they go back to an old double bt.
"Don't camp all game only to get screwed in end game when faced with up to 4 uncounterable doublebodyblocks and nothing else to do but secure at least on kill."
So either camp to get the bt out (just like ds back in the day) or be screwed.
Not that it matters to me, I quit long ago.
-
??????
You see that @GeneralV is the Claudette? Not the dced killer?
-
Online anonymity and the resulting missing consequences for unsocial behaviour.
There is a German proverb, "Opportunity makes the thief".
It means given an opportunity, especially without consequences being anonymous behind a screen, people might show their worst behavior.
I'm not innocent either but my guilty pleasure is playing evil characters in RPGs or DND, where I don't hurt anybody real.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614142#Comment_3614142
You're answering the wrong question. You're asking 'If we choose the killer and survivor teams at random, what are the odds we get a top 1% team on each side?'
That's not the question I'm responding to, nor is it relevant to a killer win streak conversation. We're looking at 'what are the odds a top 1% killer gets a top 1% survivor SWF when the killer queues up?'
Again, these are killer win streaks, so it *only* matters if that exact killer player is in the game. A match with any other killer player doesn't count against their streak and, for the purposes of this conversation, we don't care about that game. It doesn't count against my win streak if you lose, for example.
But those swf aren't always available, because of time of day or whatever and even moreso because 4 people have to be playing together at the exact time your specific killer is looking for a lobby and be in queue.
Either you neglect these factors and I would call the result you come out with heavily flawed or you include them and come to a drastically different conclusion.
And that comes after all the simplifications I made for my explanation.
But I am done with this discussion. You don't have to accept what I am telling you and I am no longer in the mood to entertain you, explaining the same thing thrice.
-
@Katzengott said:
Easy solution: If a surv didn't got ANY points for 5 minutes, Killer Instinct progs on them and shows the the survs location to the killer. Tell me one reason why this shouldn't be in the next patch.
Because it wouldn't work for its intended purpose?
Survivor get points for touching a chest, being in the killers terror radius or step foot into the basement for example. None of those give the killer any indication where the survivor are, unlike a even slightly progressed gen.
The only point would be that survivor would risk revealing themselves outside of a locker but that is already the case when they have to switch to another to avoid crows.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613742#Comment_3613742
It's a soft cap though, isn't it? Which means that although the matchmaking range would be widened, it would still prioritise players of higher skill level and thus increase the chances of encountering a high level survivor team.
Do we know how hard it is to reach this softcap? Is it a situation similar to red ranks? How much can the skilled people go above it? How wide is the matchmaking parameter to include the bulk at the soft cap to shorten queue times for the top percent?
I would argue that the softcap makes this issue even worse because we don't know how far the top percent can even get above it and how wide the algorithm picks from and how it matches them.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613742#Comment_3613742
It's a win streak for the killer. The killer is fixed and has a 100% chance to be in that match (from their own perspective). There isn't a 'chance' on the killer roll when it's the killer queueing up.
The only variable here is the opponent.
Not for the opponents. They still get also matched with other killer and aren't even available for idealized 95% of the time.
It doesn't matter for statistics if you only look from the perspective of the one killer when the other side have more options.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613590#Comment_3613590
Even if the numbers work out the way you describe here, that 1% player is going to go up against a 1% opponent either 10% of the time or 5% of the time (using your top 10-20%).
So in 100 games, they're up against that top 1% team at least 5 or 10 times. By the time they hit 1000 games, it's 50 or 100 times, which means they're still unstoppable against a similarly skilled team.
The current SWF escape streak is about 220 ish games in a row, with a 4 man comp team SWF, which is the strongest force in the universe according to the forums. And yet they were beaten and the streak broken, which is what you'd expect from anything resembling balance in a game.
Having a killer steak this long is concerning at a minimum. Having it be determined by play style and not particular perks or abilities/add-ons makes it more concerning, since a play style is more difficult to balance. It's actually be nice if it was an obvious outlier of 'oh, clearly this add-on is overtuned', but the fact that blight, clown, twins, and nurse were the top 4 streaks last time I saw a full list means that tunneling is so strong even m1 killers can be unstoppable.
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613590#Comment_3613590
But they'd have a significantly higher chance of going up against these alleged death squads than anyone else, surely? You may have a point with smaller sample sizes, but over 1000 games, it's hard to maintain this position.
Not to mention that if the game is truly survivor-sided, then it's not just survivors of similar skill level that would be able to trump the killer, it'd be others within that 10-20% bracket too. But apparently those don't show up either because the streak goes on unbroken.
Remember, only -one- team of survivors has to outperform the killer to break the streak. But in over a thousand games, not once has the matchmaker seen fit to match this top 1% killer up against survivors that are sufficiently close to their skill level to use the 'massively survivor-sided' game's imbalance to topple the streak.
It just seems like too much of a stretch.
First of all, I don't really care about this win streak argument but wanted to correct the fact that matchmaking only ever worked like @Firellius said for a very short time around the implementation of sbmmr, which led to insanely long queue times for the top of both sides. After that it got changed and then softened at least once again. So even my 10-20% might be a low guess.
Second, @AmpersandUnderscore your statistics are based on a wrong assumption.
Tldr: You forgot that the matchmaking algorithm doesn't only pit the 1% killer against the 10-20% survivor but the same bracket percentage on both sides with however much skill comparison really involved so the chance can be waaay lower than the 5% in this example.
For the sake of the arguments I will use idealized factors like 20% fix for the top bracket used by the matchmaking, instead of 10-20% and 1killer/a 4men squad for each %.
The matchmaking algorithm is also assumed as purely RNG in the respective bracket, seeing how many people question it on regular basis on here and my personal experience that ranged from 4men swf styling on me to 4 obvious solo so bad I had to carry them to the exit in consecutive matches, despite the same playstyle for 50-100 hours during my experiment. Also because any real factoring of the algorithm would be pure speculation and make this whole thing too complicated for my after-work-brain right now.
So with that out of the way:
Even if the numbers work out the way you describe here, that 1% player is going to go up against a 1% opponent either 10% of the time or 5% of the time (using your top 10-20%).
So in 100 games, they're up against that top 1% team at least 5 or 10 times. By the time they hit 1000 games, it's 50 or 100 times, which means they're still unstoppable against a similarly skilled team.
No matter how the matchmaking algorithm works it never only puts the 1% killer (1player) vs the 20% survivor (20 4men swf) but all 20% killer vs the 20% survivor.
So the chance of the the top 1% meeting the other 1% isn't simply 5% but, just like rolling a 1 on a d20 twice in a row 1/20 times 1/20, so 1/400 aka 0.25%.
Of course this doesn't take any real work of the algorithm into consideration but also not the real amount of players in each of the % on either side. That ratio could be the perfect 1/4 but is more likely to be 1/3 or 1/2 or even more on the killer side because to be one of the 1% on killer side needs only one person and for survivor 4 need to work together.
So with my idealized model the chance of this blight main that has his 1,6k win streak to meet a swf on the same level would amounts to 4 games.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613196#Comment_3613196
I don't care how bad you think survivors are, you are not bringing a 1600+ win streak if the game was 'massively survivor sided'. Logically, if the game actually WAS massively survivor sided, that win streak would've been clipped much, MUCH earlier.
It also goes without saying that the people achieving these streaks are the top 1% of the playerbase.
But that would mean they're also getting pitted against the top 1% of the playerbase, so why aren't their streaks breaking?
Because matchmaking never worked that way?
At the best of times it pitched top 1% player against the top 10-20% to reduce queue times and that's only a guess already. It then got even sloppier when they softened everything about matchmaking.
Only at the beginning of sbmmr was it even close to what you describe and that ended with those 1% having 2hour+ queue times.
-
The killer in the OPs story didn't 4 ppl slug but only the last person holding a key in a hook dead zone.
(Also 4 people slugging has been confirmed as not " holding the game hostage" but instead simply being a dick move)
-
@Steakdabait said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3612523#Comment_3612523
crawling to a hook does not in fact force the killer to hook you.
But it makes it more attractive, instead of trying to force a drop and key/hatch play by being in a dead zone and (probably) wriggling.
According to the op, the killer didn't slug the other three survivor and had a valid reason here.
So if op wants to get out faster, they should simply have given the killer the more attractive option.
-
I know I am a broken record about this, but survivor on average don't show any appreciation for killer that don't tunnel, camp and/or slug.
If they can they style on them, rub in their victory and BM them in game and/or the chat after.
The times that survivor acknowledged and/or show appreciation for a killer pulling their punches is less than 20% of my personal matches during my experiment.
-
@okaayletsgoo said:
The bar just needs to fill up faster and start filling as soon as killer hooks you there's a few seconds of delay post hook. I think that would fix the issue. As far as gens being close by on 2 story maps it should be tied to floors as well so a survivor running underneath hook doesn't stop the progress bar.
???
You know that the delay is most probably in there because the killer isn't instantly teleported away from a hook when hoisting a survivor up there?
Why should it start to progress at a point where killer physically can't do anything but be next to the hook?
-
@Theo_Urista said:
that does sound like a solid solution however one problem, say if a killer manges to slug everyone and hooked them all less than 3 minutes in and none of them are able to have a chance to 4% off hook.
Well, to be honest that sounds more like matchmaking would have to have failed spectacular again for such a lopsided match in the first three minutes.
-
@Hexling said:
You waste our time we waste yours :)
Same, survivor that want to waste their time tbagging in the exit can do so.
Meanwhile I am taking a leak, getting a snack/drink or watching something on my phone or second screen.
-
@jamally093 said:
The exit gate is open...so what people escape me and many other killers all the time. I feel like the only time teabagging is "valid" is if the killer was not so friendly, aka tunneling and such. But I mean what I see as a good reason to teabag if it's gloating is if you escaped without being hit or hooked or better even found then go ahead and teabag you earned it because you played stealthy and outsmarted me but if I was able to still get some hooks from you and even then hit you no real reason to start teabagging the exit gate because fun fact. I really don't care. I find it just a way of showing you don't escape often. I seriously just prefer if left. Maybe last minute heal is alright, but just standing there not doing anything is well boring to watch, plus not really effected. "Then why are you making this post?" Simple I don't get the point of teabagging when I play survivor everyone teabags if it's because your wanting me to heal you even though I just rescued you not even a second ago which fun fact the game has to register the fact it happened. Teabagging is like flashlight clicking to me pointless and really just not at all useful.
Well, because in, what I biasedly assume, 99.9% of all cases it is just trying to taunt and/or rub in (a sometimes more, sometimes less) earned victory.
-
@CorvusCorax86 said:
His lore, cosmetics and overall gameplay concept are all interesting but it is difficult to win against a fairly decent team.
Autohaven is just awful when it comes to lockers.
Also, what's with people only locking one locker if there are 2 next to one another?
Isn't his teleport coded to prioritize the locked locker and therefore locking only one is used to conserve counterplay?
That's at least what I remember when he was released.
-
Well, killer has to micro- and macromanage against 4 people with non stop action.
Couple that with the goal of winning or rather killing as many as possible and it is no wonder that it's the physically more stressful role in the game and you naturally end up sweating.
-
@Kuffowi said:
yesterday i had to wait 5 entire minutes to find a killer match (i was killer, looking for survivors) and at that point i had almost given up. i dont think its a region thing, i use a vpn and can change my 'location' and do so sometimes, its still an issue, i dont know why lmao
Chucky is still barely a week old.
You can't expect killer queues to be normal at that point after a killer only chapter release with a popular franchise especially with something new like a third person killer.
-
And this is a prime example for why people want taking a protection hit to be a conspicuous action to deactivate DS.
-
any killers who complain about it getting abused need to git gud.
Aaaand there goes any reason to even entertain this idea. 🙋♂️
-
"Oh no, the killer suddenly also has the third person view advantage and it's no longer survivor exclusive. Please nerf!" /S 😂
-
If survivor would show appreciation for such conduct, then yes. Because positive feedback when playing like this gives validation to these playstyle.
Sadly reality is that the majority doesn't care/shows mild signs of toxicity (tbagging, not leaving without an audience) and only minority gives positive feedback and they get overshadowed by an equal or slightly bigger minority of open hostility/toxicity.
-
Look for unopened chests, hope for a key and keep an eye out for the closed hatch.
-
All hail to our lord and saviour Lightborn 😎
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3586828#Comment_3586828
Makes sense, but why would they remove posts, if it's not bad enough to warrant a warning? That's what I struggle to understand here. If they don't tell you, why they removed the post, then how will you know not do that again?
This is directed more towards the mods, who could have the answers, not you personally. Unless you have the secret knowledge too, that is.
@Shroompy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3586835#Comment_3586835
Exactly what I was thinking. I've had several of my posts taken down over the years and 2 of them gave me a warning, 1 was a shitpost on a thread I knew was getting taken down due to being highly controversial and had nothing to do with DbD, the second one was theorizing and part of my theory ended up being correct, but apparently that warranted a warning and jail time
Transparency is something that lacks on these forums. Don't know how to avoid doing something wrong if you're not telling us.
You don't get notification if a thread that contains comments from you gets deleted.
I just came back to the forums and the thread about FNAF fand being annoying was gone for example.
Happens all the time. Comments get deleted because they are in a controversial thread or they are controversial itself but not against the forum rules that you don't get a warning. Had that happen multiple times with indirect passive aggressive comments that weren't straight up insults but also not really nice 😜
-
I wouldn't say it toxic per se and of course it's a "them problem" if the opposition can't ignore it, no matter their frustration.
But on the other hand I would call it a "you problem" when you can't "read the room" or rather take/ignore negative feedback to your nicely meant gesture in a specific scenario.
I find the position of viewing GG in the wrong moment as negativ relatable. From my experience 80-90% after game chat are silent or negativ and only 10-20% are neutral or even positiv (and before you come at me with "must be you", this was in the time I played extra friendly without Camping/tunneling/excessive slugging).
If this is the experience for others then I don't blame them for taking a GG the wrong way after a lopsided game.
My personal experience with giving negativ feedback to a GG was only once after a 5 event offering Match as blight (with whom I am incredibly bad/have had not enough experience) on old haddonfield that ended in roughly 5 minutes with only two hard fought hooks, 0 kills and less than 10k BP.
Afterwards they gave me a rare GG, upon which I thought "of course a GG after such a stomp" and answered "not for me". And then I got showered with one of the worst examples of aggressive toxicity I ever saw in my time.
So, sorry if some don't take kindly to your GG but their is always two sides to this.
-
I guess they were tired.
-
@Rizzo there you go
-
@Rizzo said:
There is not much we can do here about it, you can try contacting them again to see if they can tell you anything about it, but it could simply be that the ticket required no response after being solved.
Well seeing that the op here is the same as the one in the thread you just closed (talking about suspensions), I would guess the issue is clear for behaviour and doesn't make any kind of response necessary.
-
Well it's not like one has to "earn" the right to play the chapter and now people can buy it like for example the championship skins in league of legends.
At first they were exclusive for people reaching a certain rank and then became available in the shop years later but the people with the og skins became some identifier or something iirc.
But here in DBD we bought it for money and now they can simply buy it again. No exclusivity or achieving necessary and therefore no "reward".
-
@Melinko said:
So you ran back to the hook for each unhook and are curious why you got teabagged?
Running back to the hook as soon as the unhook happens is going to get you treated like a toxic player by most survivors.
Here's a thought, try hook, leave, hunt someone else and see what happens. My guess is you'll get a few kills and get 0 tea bags.
From my experience, nope.
You can change map sides after hooking someone and not return and survivor still want to rub their, sometimes "earned", victory in your face no matter how you play.
-
@Seraphor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3580724#Comment_3580724
Yeah well I've seen 2000 say how hyped they are.
Seriously? How did you spend months asking people about a character you yourself have never heard of?
Are you sure you're in your 20's? It sounds like you're in your teens.
Seeing how they soft insulted Pulsar in their other cope thread because they probably didn't have a good retort, yeah seems like it.
Also their attitude in their "it's obviously Springtrap" thread was also rather immature.
-
As high as my system allows for optimal performance.
I want any game to look good and find it cringe worthy when I see yt or streamer running on night maps with brightness higher than day maps for me only so the can see survivor better.
-
@bobateo said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3579774#Comment_3579774
The play style is no more inherently self detrimental than tunneling is inherently bad conduct.
If playing nice is a mental drain for someone then I recommend they don't do it or turn off the game for a bit. Though I am skeptical that being nice is mental drain at all. However, I might might not understand what you mean.
"Many people" is far to general a term and you can say exactly the same thing about Killer players complaining about survivors. Regardless, neither Killer nor Survivor players are a hive mind.
As for making someone feel appreciated, unless you're talking about more than a gg at ECG, I already see that fairly frequently. Yes, some people are rude in ECG and they shouldn't be, but it silly to hold everyone you might face in a online game accountable for the actions of others.
Seems like you misunderstood me, the mental drain isn't playing nice but getting sht on for not playing hard.
I did the "experiment" by playing nice and be one of the non tunneling/camping/slugging killers when the forums were full of complaints about it back then.
I did it for 2 years (sporadically playing, only 100-200 hours over the years) and I can say that in the big picture, nice/friendly/appreciative Feedback was the minority.
And like I said, the motivation gets drained over time to play that way even when people do it because they like it.
To make a far fetched comparison, when you like to be polite to people and hold the door open for them, you will eventually stop when the majority of times the gesture is simply ignored or you even get told off for doing it.
Without huge amount of satisfaction simply by doing it, the "why even bother" mentality will take over.
-
@Pulsar said:
You know, sometimes I can't tell if it's 2016 or 2023.
We always circle back to remove SWF
Well to be fair, nothing has happened in that regard between those years. So why should the complaints suddenly stop?