kamisen
kamisen
About
- Username
- kamisen
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,758
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Killmaster I'm going to ssume your response is bait. Or you can't read.
-
If you count 12 minutes on average per game, and then an additional 3 minutes in queues, load screens etc, you would need about 8 hours of game time per day to complete it.
I don’t know if 300xp per game sounds right though
-
@chase131119 A) what a weird statement seeing that they upped the grind in developement. B) This type of gatekeeping is very counterproductive if you want to have players in different stages. Each time they release a level, everyone will be at the exact same point.
-
@Boss I can see it but no touchy touchy.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
Are those the Challenges of the Live Version or the PTB? Because Level 1 already changed compared to the PTB.
Regardless, you can get the Rift Fragments via playing as well. So I think its ok to have hard challenges. The ones for the Lore are pretty doable. You will need a few Trials tho.
They are from the live version. You can see them for yourself when you have completed the tome.
-
I would love it if some DBD-guru answered <3
-
You can only earn it by progressing through the rift. The grind is insane.
Edit: the free track is only needed.
-
Why on earth is this a priority BHVR? Fix the actual sound issues instead. Ffs.
-
-
@UlvenDagoth :) accepted without hesitation.
-
@se05239 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/780779#Comment_780779
The Fear of Missing Out is a very powerful psychological trigger that companies abuse in their players to maximize revenue. That's what the Battle Pass is, afterall. They made it too hard to complete normally, so they want you to open up your wallet and buy tiers instead.
Yup. I’m just hoping there has been a major mistake in a line of code somewhere, and that the rift pass is much easier to complete than what we anticipated.
-
@UlvenDagoth said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/780754#Comment_780754
How can you be sure that everything they are doing is just to line there pockets? I don't believe that they are in this just for greed or anything like this. I agree with you that if they said something then it would be clearer, but it's enough to me that the Devs care about this whiny, toxic community enough to put up with us. That's my opinion I know, But it's honestly all I can ask for from a company that deals with so many people at once.
First, I’m not saying “everything they do”. I’m exclusively talking about the battle pass system, as the post I responded to was about. We cannot know for certain until the actual pass comes out but from the looks of it, the pass is created based on some of the common monetisation schemes.
Now with that out of the way, do I think BHVR are greedy to the core? Absolutely not. I believe they are as passionate about the game as we are. I also believe they genuinely care about the community and that they do what they believe is best for the time being. It just doesn’t always line up with what the community thinks is best.
P.S Read this and tell me they are not in it for the money:
Virtual Economist Ramin Shokrizade explains in detail the top methods used to trick consumers into spending in F2P games. -
@Mikeasaurus said:
It's starting to become a trend nowadays with Game devs becoming more and more silent with their fanbases. EA have become the most greedy devs with their constant loot boxes. Activision have done the same, but making their games so P2W it's unbeleivable. Bungie with recent D2 Shadowkeep was just a complete recycle of a single location from D1 and broken servers. Epic Games with Fortnite Chapter 2 has become so much of a grindfest that they're practically making people pay for that battle pass progression. I really hope BHVR aren't following trend with these devs actions, because I love DbD, but this battle pass thing is making me very concerned for the future of this game. I don't want everything handed to me on a plate from this pass, but if it's going to be a mega grind, it might not be worth even doing all that much. Nobody wants to spend hours a day grinding out for items when they have other priorities in life, or maybe even other games to be playing.
I feel you. Slightly off topic, but here goes: the new trend in the gaming industry with P2W is scummy. We all know that. What is even more scummy, for me, is building elements that benefits from pure psychological tomfuckery.
What really grinds my gears about the upcoming system for DBD, is the fact that it s designed to be impossible to complete. At least according to the data of several members of the community. There has been sooo many studies on how human brains react to potential loss. And this system benefits from this. Pay to not lose out on tiers.
This type of deal makes me lose respect for BHVR big time. But we’ll wait and see. Here’s some good reads on the subject f you’re interested:
Virtual Economist Ramin Shokrizade explains in detail the top methods used to trick consumers into spending in F2P games.In the ultra-competitive market of video gaming, selling randomized rewards can bring in extra revenue for developers.Electronic Arts have spent the past week fighting off a cavalcade of negative press following details of their microtransaction model for Star Wars Battlefront II. Current estimates of total content acquisition come to $2,100 or 4,500 hours of in-game play time, with a requirement of around 40 hours of in-game play time per character. This business decision could not have come at a worse time as gamers are increasingly fighting back against loot boxes and microtransactions. Last month, a petition reached over 10,000 signatures asking British MPs to discuss loot boxes in parliament in relation to current UK gambling legislation. Just today, the Belgian Gaming Commission announced that it is launching an investigation into whether loot boxes can be considered as gambling. With such a big conversation currently taking place about loot boxes and microtransactions, I thought it would be interesting to take a psychological perspective on this issue. In this article, I will be presenting research findings on the psychological effects and impact of loot boxes and microtransactions. In order to clearly separate the two: Loot boxes refer to a random chance of obtaining your desired item. In games such as Overwatch, there is no way to directly earn or pay for your item, the item must be obtained from a loot box or purchased from currency obtained from loot boxes. Microtransactions refer to the ability to directly give a company money for an item or character. Microtransaction models typically allow for items/characters to be purchased with in-game currency earned through continuous play (e.g. League of Legends). Now, let’s begin. There will be a summary at the end if you do not feel like reading it all, I won’t judge you. Loot Boxes Loot boxes can be compared to traditional gambling for two main reasons: The ‘win state’ of a loot box is a gamble. Gamers will typically purchase loot boxes with the hope of obtaining particular skins or items in the game. This hope can be referred to as a ‘win state’ and the chances of reaching this win state are completely random. In loot box models, there is no way to force a win state. In microtransaction models, you can at least give real or in-game currency to obtain exactly what you want. Just as you can’t make a slot machine give you the jackpot, you can’t make a loot box give you what you want. In my previous article on the psychology of difficult video games, I talked about how human beings need to work small victories and positive feelings into their daily lives. The sad reality is that gambling, including loot boxes, is designed in a way where even if you don’t reach your win state, you’ve had some fun. Research by Kim (1998) found that waiting for the outcome of a gamble can activate the brain’s chemical reward system, releasing endorphins that create pleasure. In a gaming context, think of someone who really wants the Pharah Anubis skin in Overwatch. They buy five loot boxes and get excited during the big flashy box-opening animation. This excitement happens five times in a short space of time, with five flashy box-opening animations that are almost an event in itself. So the person received five endorphin rushes which were met with five disappointments. This means that they will stop now…right? Unfortunately, sometimes our brains are not our best friends. In the field of gambling research, there are five (yes, five) cognitive fallacies a person in a fail state can go through that will eventually lead them right back to gambling. These fallacies are: Chasing (Rogers, 1998): Chasing involves the process of continuing to gamble to recoup losses incurred by gambling. The person may be unhappy that they bought five loot boxes and didn’t receive their Pharah skin. If they bought ten loot boxes and received it, that would be more satisfying than buying five loot boxes and getting nothing. The Gambler’s Fallacy (Rogers, 1998): The Gambler’s Fallacy refers to thinking that a negative outcome is less likely to happen now that several negative outcomes have occurred. In a nutshell, they believe they’re closer to the Pharah skin because they’ve had several bad boxes. ‘Self-Correcting and Fair’ (Kahneman et al., 1982): This fallacy involves the belief that gambling is ‘self-correcting and fair’. People will feel that they are ‘due’ or ‘entitled’ to a win as their luck has been poor thus far. Basically, “Those boxes were awful, the next ones will be good”. Cheating the System (Turney, 2008): This fallacy is similar to the fallacy above, but people may become delusional and feel that they have figured out the ‘trick’ to getting what they want from the random chance. Think “I got three sprays in one box, that means the next ones will have skins!”. The Entrapment Effect (Rogers, 1998): The Entrapment Effect argues that people may feel obligated to continue investing in the game because they have already invested too much money to give up their pursuit. Similar to Chasing, the gamer may feel obligated to continue purchasing loot boxes until they eventually get what they want. After all, they’ve already spent so much in their pursuit, they may as well reach their win state. Biological support for gambling cognitive fallacies comes from van Holst et al. (2012). During an MRI scan, frequent gamblers and non-frequent gamblers were asked to estimate the probabilities of winning and losing different amounts of money. Not only were frequent gamblers worse at estimating losses, but they experienced an increased blood supply to the regions of the brain associated with reward expectancy when estimating wins. This suggests that frequent gamblers learn to minimise loss and have overly optimistic expectations for win states. To summarise, the event of opening a loot box is designed to be exciting to compliment a person’s sense of excitement and anticipation. When a person experiences a fail state, there are at least five different cognitive fallacies they can experience to justify spending more money to reach their win state. This can lead to an adjustment in brain activity where losses are minimised and win states become overly optimistic. Microtransactions Microtransactions are trickier to discuss as they are not as straightforward as loot boxes’ random nature of win states. In fact, those who give in to microtransactions can be taunted by other gamers for not exhibiting enough self-control to just earn the product in-game. However, with EA’s recent revelation of requiring 40 hours of in-game time for one character, this practice is becoming harder to justify. With this in mind, I am going to approach microtransactions from two perspectives. The first is the idea of a microtransaction as the giving of real currency to obtain an in-game item, character or boost. The second is the idea of a microtransaction as the giving of in-game currency obtained through repeated play. Microtransactions: Real Currency As previously mentioned, those who give in to microtransactions may be subject to ridicule from other gamers for showing low self-control. It is assumed that these people simply have no impulse control and are bad with money. However, this raised an interesting question to me: what is the cause-effect relationship between playing games and impulse control? Do people who spend a lot on microtransactions already suffer from low impulse control, or does frequent video game playing somehow impact their ability to control their impulses? To extrapolate, impulsivity is defined as “the predisposition for rash and unplanned actions without forethought for future consequences” (Barratt, 1985). When I initially searched for video gaming and impulsivity, I was tripping over research which told me that those who play a lot of video games have low impulse control (Billieux et al., 2015; Billieux et al., 2012; Zhou et al., 2014). Allow me to elaborate on a few: Metcalf and Pammer, 2014: This study compared regular first-person shooter (FPS) players with FPS players whose lives were being consumed by FPS games (e.g. not getting enough sleep, disrupting social life, causing home-life disruptions). It was found that the latter group had significantly higher impulsivity test scores that the regular FPS group. This finding has financial implications for FPS gamers as they may make impulsive decisions regarding character or item purchases irrespective of price tag. However, this study can be criticised as being androcentric due to its all-male population. Pawlikowski and Brand, 2011; Yao et al., 2015; Dong et al., 2013: These studies together argue that reduced risky decision-making is a key impairment in those exhibiting signs of online game addiction. These people also do not consider the future implications of actions such as excessive spending. Nuyens et al. 2016: Heavy League of Legends players found it more difficult to delay rewards and gratifications in a task than non-heavy players. In a nutshell, they want their reward and they want it now. So we have a plethora of research which shows that those who play video games at a possibly pathologic level may harm their financial status due to low impulse control and a great desire for rewards. However, is there any credence to the idea that the current gaming climate can impact someone’s impulsivity? Unfortunately, yes. While impulsivity was previously believed to be an innate personality trait, there is evidence to suggest that impulsivity can be learned through repeated exposure to the event – a process known as disinhibition (Goudriaan et al., 2004; Conversano et al., 2012). Hypothetically, a non-impulsive person could become interested in a game and its loot boxes or microtransactions. Through repeat purchases of loot boxes or microtransactions, they may begin to throw caution to the wind with their financial decisions. However, as learned impulsivity is an emerging field, there is a lack of evidence regarding other factors which can contribute to it. For now, it’s an interesting idea which posits that a slippery slope for microtransactions is indeed possible. Microtransactions: In-Game Currency With the revelation that Battlefront II requires around 4,500 hours of in-game play time to unlock all content, it may be time to ask ourselves whether inflating the time it takes for an individual to reach a win state in a game is potentially dangerous. Interestingly, the answer may lie in the genre of game. A large-scale research study in South Korea found that the most addictive genres of games in this region were MMORPGs and shooters (Lemmens & Hendriks, 2016). When breaking down what exactly makes these games addictive, two main components include reward features and in-game achievements (Elliot et al., 2012). Battlefront II, a shooter, is asking gamers to play around 40 hours before being rewarded by a character. The combination of an addictive genre with such spaced-out reward features may result in real-life consequences such as lack of sleep and potential fallout over how much time is being spent in the game (Metcalf & Pammer, 2014). Borrowing from The Entrapment Effect from the loot boxes section, it is possible that people will continue to invest long amounts of time into the game because they see how close they are to unlocking a character. “I’ve played 30 hours and I’m 10 hours away from a character, I may as well keep going”. However, a silver lining may come in the form of a qualitative study of World of Warcraft players (Karlsen, 2010). In this study, those interviewed described the boring tedium of grinding in the game. Although it was boring, micro-rewards were identified from grinding such as the successful drop of a material that would contribute towards a crafting objective. It appears that Battlefront II’s system will not involve micro-rewards, it will simply be around 40 hours of play before a character is unlocked. If these 40 hours are full of uncooperative teammates and being told to #########, this 40 hour stretch may not provide sufficient rewards to keep playing. In summary, paid microtransactions may prey on gamers with low impulse control. However, it is unfair to look down upon these people as theoretically anyone can become a low impulse gamer through the slippery... -
@UlvenDagoth I see. I also think the developers still “care” about the community. However, there’s an obvious divide between the interest of the community and what generates a big profit for the company. IF they just acknowledged this, it would be much easier to discuss. They are a business after all. But right now, it feels like they’re keeping up a facade - and no one likes being decieved.
-
@UlvenDagoth said:
or they say this
Peanits Dev∙Community Manager › Dev, Community Manager Posts: 3,951
that sounds like extra work, they would never do that lol. ) <- (This is what Peanits was replying too)
I don't see how the rudeness is necessary. Everyone here is working hard to get it ready as soon as possible. This is one of the biggest updates in a long time combined with an engine update. Some things went wrong and we wouldn't feel comfortable putting the update out in the state it's in. I'm sorry if this is disappointing to you, but shoving the update out the door right now isn't a better option.
As far as the event goes, everything will still be happening according to plan, just slightly after it was originally planned. You won't lose any days, the end date will be shifted back to match.
Want a screen shot?
I don’t follow how this ties in with my post though. I’m talking about the general disconnect between BHVR and community.
-
@MrsMaliciousX said:
My thing is, Is there used to be a live stream almost every week ALMOST.
I get that "not alot happens for us to be updated on" But come on..We haven't really had much lately.
They used to be so much more verbal with us. They say that they will let us know. But truth be told. We won't hear or know ANYTHING until they decide to post when its going to happen. Either the day before or a couple days. But until then its going to be radio silent.
Another thing is, is that some people want the battle pass and some don't. Well I think its a smart move, BUT I also think that its kinda dumb in a way. Because (I don't play fornite) every battle pass that I've ever played everyone had the chance to get the SAME THING. unless you wanted different bundles thats when you had to pay extra and actual money.
I honestly think that it would be a smart move on their part to not only have the PAID but also allow people to use their shards for the battle pass as well. I know alot of people that have over 30,000 shards because they don't use them. I think that would be a smart move BECAUSE there are people that can't put in x amout of hours in one day, BUT they could spend the however many cells to unlock a tier. Just whats going on in my head.
Back to them not telling us as much..How long has DH been broken? And it still isn't fixed, we don't even know if there is a fix happening. Not only that but people are having their accounts wiped or not earing the BP that they are supposed to. There is alot of stuff going on that we haven't heard any feed back on.
Im not upset that they postponed the event. Im upset with how little feedback we've been getting when they all say "This isn't our game, its yours" but it surely hasn't been feeling like it.
@MrsMaliciousX don’t get me started on DH! I would love it if they said “schmuck it, let’s focus on game health this chapter”. Here’s to hoping!
-
@Sairek I’m totally with you on this one
-
@Rex_Huin said:
Dear BHVR,
Lets work out a good deal! You don't want to be responsible for disappointing thousands of people and I don't want to be responsible for destroying the auric cell economy - and I will.
I have worked hard to solve some of your problems. Don't let the world down. You can make a great deal.
History will look upon you favourably if you get this done the right and humans way. It will look upon you forever as the devil if good things don't happen. Don't be a tough guy. Don't be a fool!
I will call you later
@Rex_Huin I love you for this
-
My man....You just created a new meme
-
@Fibijean said:
Problem is, what they tweeted in no way suggests that they're fixing the patch content. "The Withering Blight event is postponed until the release of the mid-chapter 3.3.0". That makes it sound like The Archives, as part of the mid-chapter, have always been set to be released at a later date, and it's only the event specifically that's been delayed until then.
It's a pretty confusing statement, so I could be wrong, but I don't think that the optimistic attitude of "well, clearly they're fixing things up with the patch" or "I'm fine with a delay if it means they release something more polished", while comforting, really has any basis in what they've actually said.
@Fibijean I second this. “Unforeseen circumstances” doesn’t sound like a fix to me. But I hope I’m wrong, of course :-)
-
Thank you for the kind words @Fibijean.
-
@monka I don’t get why they can’t let us in on the thought process. Maybe they have a grand scheme. Maybe they want to equalise all killers in the long run. But unless they communicate this, it seems haphazardly and uncalled for.
-
@VSLl said:
Oh yes, you are completely right. There used to be hours-long streams and developers answered questions live. Now we see a record for 20 minutes without any answers to questions. At the forum, developers also avoid answering hot questions, instead they just say this:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/092/UOH7OMKHKXII.png
They say that they want to be closer to their audience and listen to it, but actually not. There is a complete ignore.
@VSLI It feels like they want to contain the damage until they can showcase something concrete. But in doing so, they are loosing crediblity instead.
-
@se05239 Hell yes. I’ll take that any day over some sazzy special effects.
-
@Horus Hopefully a mod will help you get over yourself.
-
Wow. It really is a cash-grab.
-
I approve of the trolling in this post 👍
-
Aren’t you going to address any of the nurse-changes in this Q&A?
-
Dead hard is not working properly. I get the exhausted status, but the perk does not active.
-
@BlueFang Good bot <3
-
Alexa, play despacito.
-
@pernil said:
this will change when dedicated serve... oh i think this fanboy reply doesnt work here srry
haha <3
-
@RakimSockem That's basically what happened to me. I hate farming-games.
-
@Dwight_Fairfield I obviously want to move on to the next game as soon as possible. 80 seconds per gen isn't very fast.
-
Hard! I do not want to be in red ranks. Take me out of here please.
-
It's not naming and shaming, so your good with the blur.
-
Instant as survivor. On PC.
-
I don't hate anyone..but I loooove PIG. Oink!
-
@Dr_Loomis My eyes roll so far back they come back from below.
-
@twistedmonkey I agree with you, the game will definitely be fine. We are probably talking about a very small percentage of the player base who (if at all) permanently leaves the game. TBH, I’ve never seen a game recieve as many death-threaths as this game does :-).
Deranking by suicide is, according to this 1-year-old thread, bannable: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/6598/bannable-offenses
Peanits says: ”Intentionally deranking: Yes, it is bannable (WITH A HUGE ASTERISK, READ ON). If your are intentionally dying in your games to lower your rank, you are hurting the other people in the game by ruining their experience and making it tougher on them. Though these days it's much easier to do something and still derank, so you could still do something to help the team and derank in the end if you really want.”
I guess they track it by using in-game reports.
Either way, I do hope that they figure something out that caters to casual SWFs as well. Without reverting the new changes.
-
@twistedmonkey While the game needed this change, I think you are overestimating casual players' threshold.
On the forum people chant: "Your friends need to get better!", "Play KYF instead", "They KNOW that they're meeting someone better, they can prepare", "Punish deranking players so they stay in their rank".
My casual friends are having none of that. They simply said: "Let's find a new game, then!". Not one word about KYF, getting better or preparing more.
If deranking by suicide really is bannable and I cannot make my friends revisit the game, I will probably be a much less frequent player as well.
-
Hey man, I have the exact same issue as you do. I created a thread about this earlier today, with the suggestion to introduce a new gamemode for "casual" play.
If there are no ways for me to play with my friends we will have to find another game to play. They are simply no having fun in the current version of SWF.
-
@Mr_K Who me? I don't think there will be a difference in terms of tryharding. But the skill will vary!
-
@jthm0138 That would mean I need to browse to steam/discord before playing, then find two people that wants to play with us as well as adding them to my friend list. I'm gonna be honest with you and say it's not ideal in terms of smooth gameplay (for me). Sorry for being such a pessimist.
It's not the end of the world if it doesn't sort itself. We'll find a new game to play in no time!
-
@TAG They could add it as an customizable option...maybe?
-
@ToastfaceKilla They only play casually, maybe five or six times a month or so. They are getting better, but it's just a very slow process.
-
@DocOctober That's a good idea! Kind of like a private/public lobby.
-
@Xboned That's my thinking as well. You go in blind, each game a new possibility.
I would love an unranked mode to test different builds on the killer side as well.
-
@DocOctober I see what you're saying, but I'm not talking about minimum requirements. A 2v1 is not the same thing as a 4v1.
This may be a good option for you. But for me it doesn't scratch the DBD itch.
-
@DocOctober I don't think that's the same thing.
Nonetheless, we don't fill a KYF-lobby so it doesn't solve my problem.
