miketheratguy
miketheratguy
About
- Username
- miketheratguy
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@DoritoHead said:
If Otz said it, it must be true!
I have no idea who this person is but I'm assuming that he's a streamer, and if anyone's an expert on objective, non-sensationalized analysis, it's streamers.
-
I think that like any decent company BHVR respects many of its players but also has to deal with constant streams of undue hatred and relentless complaints about virtually everything that they do, or don't do. I spoke at great length about this in another thread last night ("What if a different company made this game"). BHVR, like all game companies, are for-profit. They're not charities. Their goal is to make money while providing a product that people enjoy and want to buy. They seem to have been very successful at this. They could have left it at that, but in the interest of making more money and providing more products that their audience likes, they continue to work on the game even five years later.
Do they listen to the fans? Apparently not always, or at least don't always agree with them, but they do seem to hear many of the complaints. But this game is a very complicated machine and there are a lot of forces behind the scenes. There's concept design, graphic art, texture making and modeling, marketing, promotion, all kinds of elements that effect all kinds of various aspects of the game. It's never as simple as saying "I want this" and having the developer say "you got it!" and then getting precisely what you want the next day - especially when this game has millions of players, many of whom can't even agree on whether a map is fairly balanced or not.
I do believe that there should be a liaison between the players and the developers, someone who can be trusted to hear the fans out, put up with the verbal abuse, and filter the constructive criticism from the entitled demands, and who can then report back to the developers and help them to understand where players are being caused the most frustration. Yes, I do agree with that. But the idea that they're incompetent, that they don't care, that they don't bug test the game, that they don't care about the players, etc., you guys have to realize that these same things are said in pretty much every forum for every popular game that exists. It's hyperbolic and largely untrue, and the more it's repeated the less likely the developers ARE to respect the fanbase.
The people who made this game aren't laughing at you with their feet on gilded tables made of marble and cocaine. They're human beings trying to weigh what they think is best for the overall longevity of the game and what the more reasonable fans would like to have.
-
@Khorzad said:
Hillbilly, Max jr. He didn’t deserve the hell that his parents subjected him to, nameless, locking him up, beating him for no reason and then using him as their personal slave for the farm...Is no wonder that he eventually snapped and kill them all.
And reading his entries in the archives makes his situation even tragic, as even after killing his paren, he is left with a mixture of hate,anger and sadness, trying to understand why they couldn’t just love him. We see that he knows enough about the exterior world that he realized that he shouldn’t have been raised like this, that he could have been better if his “family” gave him a chance or if anyone would have lend him a hand.
She loses consciousness. He feels bad and holds her limp body. "Why? Why did you hate me? What did I do to make you both hate me so much?" Her face is both beautiful and hideous at the same time. Evil veiled by beauty. He hugs her, harder and harder, wishing everything would have been different, wishing he were one of those damn pigs. They spoiled them with love, affection and time — all that time they spent with Duke and Donny while he grovelled nameless and alone in a dungeon built just for him.
His thoughts wander to his favourite TV shows. Ma and Pa let him have a TV to shut him up. They got tired of him smashing the wall and crying for them. Nothing worked. Not the gag or the rope that he always managed to get out of. Only the TV.
Those pigs. Those damn pigs they loved so much. Why did they have to love them so much and him so little. Had they treated him like those pigs he would have been happy. He would have been happy and he would have been something else. He would have been a hero like that boy who wore a cape and helped the world all because of how his Ma and Pa raised him.
Then everything changes when he speaks. The sounds upset his Ma. She beats him across the head, holds him down and pours hot sauce down his throat and tells him to never speak again. His Pa grabs him and gives him a lashing with his belt. His eyes spring open. Everything could have been so different had he not been born a monster. Born a monster? Monsters aren't born. They're made. Made in a crucible of hate, cruelty and abuse. Hot sauce and belts! That's the stuff of monsters.
In a way that reminds me of Frankenstein's Monster. He was cobbled together and abandoned because his creator was disgusted by his appearance and fled with regret at what he'd done. The Monster was confused and alone, had regular human emotions and didn't understand why he'd been birthed and then discarded. He learned to read, articulate, and understand the world around him, which he tried to treat with kindness but was constantly met with attacks and abuse. When he finally caught up with Victor, his creator, the Monster asked why he would do such a thing, why someone would give him life only to then abandon that life and treat it as if it had no right to love or friendship or care of any kind.
Of course, for the story to have the effect that it does Victor further enrages the Creature who does some pretty horrible stuff, but Victor is the one who pushes him into those positions. He (Victor) realized that what he did was wrong but rather than take responsibility for it (until it's too late) he runs from his deeds and shuns the innocent that he brought into the world. It's really a sad story.
-
@Aneurysm said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148573#Comment_2148573
These are the first girls I've had, they're still getting used to us as they're rescues and haven't had much human contact although one of them (Demeter) has been extremely friendly from day 1
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/DJNZ92QSWUA3/img-20210427-085254137.jpg
Ah, beautiful albinos. I used to appreciate them less than other varieties because where I shopped they were quite common, but for some reason they rapidly became rare and I learned to love and accept them as readily as any others (though it's hard for any variety to beat blue dumbos as far as I'm concerned).
I'm guessing you already have experience raising rats but I found long ago that it helps a lot to have your hand laying in their enclosure when you can do so. For example, if it's not too big or if you can sit near it while doing something else (watching TV, etc.), just open it and let your hand rest inside for a little while each day. Not open - you don't want your fingers being nipped - but in a fist, which will allow the rats to become accustomed to your scent and less timid over time. I've employed this trick with many rats and as long as they're not overly afraid / aggressive and liable to bite, it only took maybe a week of doing this for 15 or 20 minutes a day to make them a lot more willing to be handled, come out of their hiding spots, etc.
Here I am with arguably the best little rat my girlfriend and I ever had. She was getting old and loved spending time sleeping on us.
Sorry to have hijacked the thread everybody, I didn't mean to.
-
@Northener1907 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148490#Comment_2148490
Well i dont know why stats different. I listed my matches. And it is really boring when you play against same killers again and again. I am not writing because i am losing my matches. I think i am escaping more than die. But games are boring. When i see Freddy i know what i will do. Okey that is Nurse, lets make her fail blinks. Spirit hih, lets die on hook and go for next game etc.
Yes, it is boring to face the same killers repeatedly over a short period of time. That's one reason why I hated the Trickster right from the start and am quickly coming to hate the Wraith as well. Spirit annoys me quite a bit but for me that's mainly because I keep getting games where she starts the match right near me, gets me quickly and before anyone else, and pretty much ruins the match for me from there. When I face the Spirit it's almost always a waste of my time. It's like she comes with a homing device that's built specifically to locate and target me.
-
@Vyne456 said:
We need ways to make more shards and a daily login so I can buy the killers and survivors, also some cosmetics.
I understand that the character packs are a source of income and that their fees are basically compensation for the work (and, in the case of licensed characters, the cost of the license) so for that reason I'm okay with being charged for them. I like the fact that none of them are required, that I can pick and choose which ones I want. When they're on sale they're remarkably inexpensive (the most expensive pack I bought was Stranger Things which I think was roughly 5 dollars, most of the others averaged like $2 dollars per character which is very reasonable).
The cosmetics, on the other hand, are obscenely overpriced. Why does one "rare" outfit for one character cost roughly as much as two entire chapter packs? Three "rare" outfits are the cost of the entire BASE GAME. That is, to me, patently absurd. I don't even get the sense of them being that expensive for the killers considering that the person playing as the killer barely even gets to see the outfit. You can buy SOME (why not all?) outfits with shards but not only is THAT requirement also profoundly overpriced, to top it off shards are stupidly slow to accumulate.
I do appreciate that the game isn't pay to win. No game should ever allow players to spend real world money to give them an in-game advantage. But they went overboard with the cosmetic prices. I get that players are expected to spend a lot of time with the game and that outfits are therefore expected to be unlocked slowly, throughout that time, but there are like 200 of them. I'd be afraid to count them all and do the math to figure out how long it would take, or how much real money it would cost, to obtain them all.
TL;DR: Yes, I fully agree. Shards should be obtainable through challenges or daily logins or some other kind of gameplay mechanic that's more generous than the one we have now.
-
Oh okay yeah, that's what I was thinking. I don't know why this game doesn't use the same system. Presumably if someone has a win percentage of 75 percent it would be fair to match them with other people who are also at or near 75 percent. I understand that for killers a "win" isn't as clear-cut as it is for a survivor but I'm sure that it could be figured out.
@gilgamer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148505#Comment_2148505
I mean sure having the tiers can be a sense of progression, a couple other things i've thought about or seen others suggest is to make it so that as soon as you unlock a teachable that perk is available on ever character of that type in its tier 1 version, would solve a few issues like make getting teachable a lot more satisfying as well as make it so that level 1 characters aren't so awful to level up and would give people a much better sense of progression as they level up different characters blood webs.
Another thing i've thought about was to make the stacking BP effects of BBQ and WGLF base kit and buff or leave alone perks as the devs see fit, I dont like the idea of having a farm perk really and BBQ is practically a must use for a lot of people regardless of if people like its aura reading abilities same with WGLF, as its a bit of a weaker perk overall, not bad though with its somewhat recent buff.
I do like a sense of progression but it's more organic and less linear and grindy in some games. Perfect Dark and Timesplitters, for example. Somewhat old games made by Rare. They had you constantly unlocking new weapons, maps, and characters with pretty much every match. In this game it's basically just "start with a decent perk, then get a slightly improved version of it, then get a slightly improved version of that". Not really progression so much as just spinning your wheels until you get a small upgrade.
Granted, that might feel different depending on a person's philosophy. If you play just to have fun, like I generally do, without the specific goal of acquiring more or better perks, then leveling is less of a grind than something that just happens passively while you play. Also, fortunately for me, the perks I've enjoyed the most are largely available from the start - Bond, Dark Sense, Kindred - so I guess if BBQ is about aura reading then I appear to like the survivor version of it. So again, in a way I'm lucky that so far I enjoy using perks that show up pretty early, but at the same time it DOES sort of suck that Bond, just as an example, has to be leveled all the way up with whatever character happens to start seeing it in their bloodweb. It WOULD be nice to be able to just have that perk available from the start to assign to the character. I mean one of my characters is just sitting at level 50, being used solely to exhaust her items and get points that I'm applying to someone else, and she never even got the third version of Bond.
-
@Aneurysm said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148496#Comment_2148496
Female rats 😅 although having four daughters who end up fighting each other after all trying to run on their wheel at the same time would also be interesting
LOL yes it would. I don't have any kids myself but have heard various names and descriptions given to them by parents so "my little (human) rats" wouldn't have been a stretch for me.
They really are sweethearts though. Females in particular, though I've had good and bad on both sides. I named one of my girls Shampoo because she wouldn't stop grooming, thus "washing" me.
-
@Yaassin_q8 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148505#Comment_2148505
It's based on how well you did in a game instead of your level
Hmm...What's the criteria for how well someone did in a game if not W/L ~ K/D?
-
@Yaassin_q8 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148468#Comment_2148468
You know maybe if they implement the same matchmaking system fps games use with a bit of adjustment it could actually work
Are those games not matched based on W/L percentage? (You can tell I'm not much of an online gamer, lol.) That's what seems like the most blatantly common sense matchmaking system to me. This guy's won 5 matches and lost 100, pair him with someone with a similar ratio. Don't throw him against someone who's won 794 matches and lost 42 just because their arbitrary "rank" on a 20 point scale happens to fall within the 8 point differential.
@gilgamer said:
1 thing they could do is to remove perk tiers. Would help massively reduce the annoying grind.
I have to admit that I kind of like the perk tiers, I find it satisfying to see the stronger version of my favorite ones showing up in my bloodweb. That doesn't make it any less of a grind though, and usually the differences are very small (I can't remember which but there's at least one perk out there that grants something like a 5 / 6 / 7 percent difference in something. I mean really?
I also don't like that teaching perks means that other characters still have to grind through the tiers. I made the mistake of thinking that any tier of a perk could show up in any other character's bloodweb at any time. Nope, it seems like I get the teachable perk at maybe level 15 or 20, then the 2nd tier of it around maybe level 30, then the final one around level 40. I thought that I'd be able to enjoy raising a new character's levels WITH the teachable perks, not level all the way up just to GET them.
-
@Aneurysm said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148462#Comment_2148462
Ahhh that's great :) I've had rats for years now, currently four young girls who are very cute and extremely exhausting
As in, actual human girls, or female rodents? I could read your post both ways. XD
-
@Northener1907 said:
There is 23 killers. But there is so much Nurse and Spirit mains. I dont remember when i saw last time Plague, Pig, Trapper, Demo, Twins.
So much Nurse, Spirit mains. Nightmare, Oni, Legion, Doctor, Huntress is so common. Most of my matches i am seeing those 7 killers, others so rare.
I'm just going to ignore all the needless hostility in this thread and say that I also see quite a lot of Spirits, so I understand. She's not the most fun character to go against. I don't see a LOT of Nurses, but for some reason I'm pretty good against The Nurse so I don't mind either way.
I record all of my matches and I've gone through them recently. Right now the killers I've faced the most are Trickster, Wraith, Spirit, Trapper, and Doctor. I don't like facing most of them except for Doctor, who I think is interesting enough to play against and not always played by an expert. There's a Trapper (or two, or more) going around with the frost skin right now who is just brilliant at trap placement and map pressure. 4Ks every time I face him, or them. I can't remember the last time I went against a Wraith or Trapper who was only average. It seems like every Wraith or Trapper player is a master. That gets tiring very fast.
I wish I saw more Onis. I like that guy, I've only gotten to play against him like five or six times. I never see Blight, Freddy, Twins or Plague either. Probably twenty times combined between them. It's interesting how different some peoples' odds are.
-
@Yaassin_q8 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148443#Comment_2148443
Yeah once i played as a killer after rank reset I'm a 10 rank killer after rank reset i was faced against rank 20 survivors it was so unfair for them after the game i looked at their perks it was all yellow just to summarize how big of an issue this is.
Yeah I don't get it, I mean I actually legitimately don't understand what they were going for. I don't comprehend what the benefit is (I'm relatively new so I'm sure I'm missing something that would make the rank reset seem much more sensible). When I first began playing it was around the 20th of March or so, and as a rank 20 player I did seem to face other players who were challenging but generally a fair and fun match. Had I joined on the 13th I would have been annihilated and maybe even quit the game right off the bat.
I don't understand it. It's like encouraging highly experienced players to delete their accounts and make new ones so that they can trick less skilled players into thinking that it's going to be an even match, only to get slaughtered.
-
@Aneurysm said:
@miketheratguy off-topic but do you have any rats?
Lol thanks for asking (and I'll be relatively short with this one, sorry for all the long posts about my mundane self). At the moment I don't, no, but I raised rats for ten years between roughly 2002 and 2012. Domestic "fancy" rats are wonderful, affectionate, loyal, playful little buggers. I go with the name "miketheratguy" because during the summer of 2008 I took my tamest rats to a big wooded park near where I used to live and let them play, sometimes in their enclosure on the picnic table while I sat and read and sometimes just running around if I was in an open space and knew that I could trust them not to take off. I got every possible look and comment you could think of, on both ends of the spectrum, but the rats were actually largely popular. Every day I was there people would come up to ask me about them and I loved the opportunity to teach people about them.
Eventually two little girls came to the park with their grandma a few times and loved coming over to pet and play with the rats. They begged their mom (over the phone) if they could get one. I spoke to the mom who was reluctant, but asked me questions, and I explained in honest terms what owning a pet rat is like. One of the requirements is having two (preferably of the same sex) because rats are social by nature and become depressed and even sick when living alone. The mom was like "oh boy, now I have to buy TWO". So I made a deal: I told the mom, and her girls, that if they came back the next day and could prove to me that they'd gone online and read about how to properly take care of rats, and show me that they bought a nice enclosure for them, I would let them have two of mine. They were beyond thrilled, and they went and did exactly as I asked. I saw the girls a couple more times and they were always happy to see me. They called me "the rat guy" and "Mike the rat guy". And the name has stuck ever since.
Though if I'm forced to be fully honest I have to admit that my favorite animals are cats. Thankfully cats and rats generally get along quite well. When the rats aren't confusing and terrifying the cats, lol. :D
-
@TicTac said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148310#Comment_2148310
One big problem is also that rank doesnt measure skill. Two red ranks can be completely different bc reaching rank 1 is not hard. So with enough playtime bad player reach it, too. And with the current almost not existing rank reset they will stay at the highest rank.
It sounds like reaching red rank isn't hard because the system pairs players up with others who may be of a vastly different skill level. I also don't understand the purpose of the rank reset. How is that a positive? Doesn't it just deceive the poorer players into thinking that they're going against players of equal skill? I mean if I'm (hypothetically) red rank tier and my rank suddenly switched to 20, aren't I going to have that much greater a chance of ruining the games of people who are legitimately new, or less skilled, and thus at rank 20 naturally? It sounds like the ranking system is almost specifically designed TO get players of totally random skill levels to be in the same match. I don't get it.
-
@_NIGHTMARE_ said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148104#Comment_2148104
Man, if only I could up-vote this more than once...
Thank you for sharing your experience and shedding some light on the issue from another perspective.
I don't know what others think, but for me, it was genuinely really refreshing to read this.
:)
Thank you very much for that compliment, that was a really nice thing to say.
I'm going to try to explain something without sounding like I'm patting myself on the back (which is difficult because this paints me in a very positive light, and I'm honestly not trying to position myself as any kind of hero):
During my time as member of the THQ forums, from 2010 to I think mid 2013, when they shut down and its userbase merged with the 2K forums, I gained a reputation as a very well-respected guy. I'm not entirely sure - mass intoxication I believe - but I think that it's because I (obviously) love to talk, love to have peaceful debates, and probably most importantly to the THQ staff, was very knowledgeable and highly passionate about the WWE game series that they'd been producing for the previous decade.
The reason I say this is to make a point: When others would viciously rant about something that they didn't like, or argue with someone who liked something that they didn't, or go straight to blaming "the clueless idiots at THQ", I would take a more objective approach and try to get them to explain why they felt the way they did without blaming, articulate their grievances more clearly, try to help them understand where they might be wrong or de-escalate the rage that they felt at being right. I guess what I'm saying is that you catch more flies with honey than vinegar. I absolutely didn't expect anything to come from this, I was just being who I am, but the "community manager" of THQ reached out to me and said that he appreciated my civility. He told me that he liked my posts, mentioned my big passionate "wouldn't it be awesome if the next game had THIS"? thread in his weekly highlight articles, and quickly became good friends with the moderators of the site. They said that I made their jobs easier.
Again, my point is NOT to congratulate myself, please don't take it that way. My point is that by simply trying to be decent and maintain a level head, see things as objectively as I could, and helping others to do the same, my presence was appreciated more than, say, one of the other regulars who kept on insisting that THQ had lazy bug testers. When the opportunity came up one of the moderators asked me if I'd be interested in joining the staff, and after some questions and back and forth debate, I said yes. Here's something else you guys need to know: Moderating is an utterly THANKLESS job. It's difficult, and it's stressful, And being that I was now in a position of authority over my forum friends, it was also very awkward for a while, more so for some than others. But I let everyone know that I would do my best to treat everyone fairly, within the boundaries of my new responsibilities, and I wouldn't play favorites because I liked someone or abuse my "powers" in a way that was wrong. I eventually gave up the position because a newcomer above me instituted a policy that I thought would do more harm to the community than good. We debated it for half an hour in a conference call and despite his wanting me to stay he ultimately said that he wouldn't beg, and that regardless of how I felt this was his call to make. I agreed that it was, and said that I would have to respectfully resign because I didn't feel comfortable enforcing a policy that I felt was wrong. I remained on the forum as a regular user but he and I were cold for the next year.
Then, after that year, I got a surprise call from him asking me to come to the playtest. We buried the hatchet then and there, and I told him that I respected him for being big enough to look past our uncomfortable disagreement and extend the offer. He told me that one of my moderator friends strongly advocated for me and he (the superior) was fully in favor of it. At the playtest we were - I reiterate - NOT in any way pressured or coerced into saying positive things about the game. In fact, for months, we couldn't even say anything about the game anyway. Just vague comments about whether we enjoyed it, that kind of thing. At the playtest, which was in a hotel conference room, all cell phones were taken during the day and the company's attorneys were present at all times. This might also help to provide some perspective to those of you who may get angry or frustrated that certain things aren't clarified, detailed, given straight or immediate answers to, etc. A lot goes into these decisions: marketing, promotion, viability testing, bug testing, contractual agreements, etc etc etc. That said, this was by no means a cold scenario. The people in charge of the playtest treated all of us warmly. We were there as guests, and we spoke as friends. The only difference is that we had to sign extremely restrictive, one-sided NDAs, and our time playing the game was to be equal parts fun AND work to be taken seriously.
I'm sorry to have gone on at such great length and I know that many of you will have scrolled past it thinking "when does this guy stop typing" but I've been doing it for a very honest reason: I wanted to share my experiences to help everyone understand that I got the opportunities that I did because I was enthusiastic and passionate, yes, but more importantly, respectful. Again, I can't and won't speak for BHVR but my own personal experiences have shown me that the chain of command DOES listen, good ideas and thoughtful discussion DOES get noticed, and that just because it may seem like a company is dodging its audience or ignoring complaints or just kicking back in the proverbial mansion lighting cigars with $100 dollar bills doesn't mean that that's actually what's happening. There's a lot that goes into a video game, especially one as ambitious as this, and even more so when licenses and copyrights are involved. But at the end of the day the people who make it are humans just like the rest of us. They feel bad or irritated when they see that their hard work is totally dismissed because someone is angry that they didn't get what they wanted. They get frustrated when something that they want to do doesn't work the way they would have liked. They try to filter out the criticism but sometimes find it difficult to separate it from the emotionally-charged anger.
So, I mean, I won't ever be the guy who comes here and says "quit complaining, the game is fine and it's you who is the problem". Pretty much any game can be improved, and this one's an especially difficult balancing act. But I also won't say that yeah, mocking the company and calling its employees lazy is going to accomplish much. I'm just a random nobody and I was trusted to moderate the forum of a major gaming company, get my name published in one of their strategy guides, and was even trusted to play and provide feedback on a game half a year before its release. So what makes me so special? Nothing. Anyone can do it. Anyone can be taken seriously enough to have their voices heard. Any company has employees who are willing to listen. And to boil down all these novels that I've written, my point is that I was taken seriously because I always demonstrated patience, courtesy, and respect. Trust me, I can attest to the fact that these traits speak louder than rage posting does.
-
@Sonzaishinai said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148266#Comment_2148266
Cotes comment about "play something else" was about people getting frustrated with the game and is actual real good advice. Really wish people would stop quoting that out of context
Half of the balance complaints about this game are people who get frustrated about every little thing because they let all the tension this game has build up. The balance really isn't that bad for a assymetrical game
Other studios tried to make games like this and they failed time and time again.
BHVR is doing a pretty good job unironically.
It's not perfect but what game is?
I was actually just thinking of editing my comment to ask what the context of that statement was. It has a confrontational tone so I would imagine (or at least hope) that it was used in defense of some ignorant broad-stroke attack or something.
Your post basically summarizes what I spent many unnecessary words trying to say, which is that yes, the game has its flaws and yes, some of those flaws could do with repairing. Also, yes, the devs could stand to interact with the community more often and more directly, at least from what I can tell. But, having said that, there IS a rather large portion of the community (not saying this specific site, but all over the internet) that does, in fact, seemingly complain about just about anything. That's what led me to mention my experience with THQ at the beginning of this thread. A person hasn't known hell until they've known the feeling of moderating a bunch of angry, entitled wrestling fans. :P
-
@TicTac said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148209#Comment_2148209
The current matchmaking is not based on total amount of time played. In theory it searches for the same rank up to a 8 rank difference , but if someone waits too long it just gives them any opponent.
Is that for certain? If so then thank you, you're the first person to give me the real answer.
Sadly the real answer is actually worse. An 8 rank difference is at least 4 ranks too much in my opinion, and I certainly don't like "if someone waits too long it just throws them in with anybody". That sucks. That's a system that definitely needs changing.
-
Such interesting answers. I almost want to make a "which killer do you have the least amount of sympathy for" thread. :P
The answers would be too easy though. Freddy and Myers are about as evil as it gets, not much competition there.
-
@Ashlich said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148244#Comment_2148244
And sadly that's how a lot of game developers do things. They ask for feedback, practically begging for it but end up using none of it. It really feels pointless when you do have people giving detailed, statistical breakdowns of why X would be more beneficial over Y, how changing this one simple thing would appease everyone etc but it all just falls on deaf ears. Then when they DO make a dev blog or something and show what they're changing it's the most head scratching nobody ever asked for this kind of changes.
I "try" to be realistic myself but after so long of just never seeing results other than "we put out more DLC for you to buy" it really grates on your nerves. I don't know if it's the developer complacency or what, but even Cotes comment of "Just go play Civ if you aren't happy" just irritates me. It feels like a cop out comment like "Yea we know things are broken, we'll get to it whenever, don't like it? go play something else".
I'll be honest, some of it is just PR. I'm not going to accuse BHVR of anything because I can't speak for them, but I've spoken to enough others to know that it's easier to say something vague to pacify the fans and hope that they accept what eventually comes in the future than it is to sit down and seriously implement what they specifically want. That's both good and bad, depending on the expectations and the results.
That isn't to say that the developers of a game are outright lying. When I was asked to take part in the unfinished game feedback, what 2K games described as a "playtest", rumors had become official that THQ was entering bankruptcy proceedings. It was known that the game in question, "WWE 2K14", would be the bridge between THQ and its employees and 2K and their employees. The game was largely developed by THQ, but 2K sort of took the reigns in the polish and promotional departments. It was a very restless time for everyone involved, in particular the fans. The top brass of THQ remained with 2K (at least at first, though many departed shortly thereafter due to being asked to relocate their homes and other such things) and no one quite knew what to expect. It was a time of transition.
I say this because I was aware from the beginning that my involvement, and the involvement of the others in the small group who were invited to this "playtest", was partly PR. When I got the phone call I was basically told that I was "the big dog of the THQ forums" (their words, not mine - I swear to God) and the most respected member of the community. By being brought in for the chance to play and provide feedback on an unfinished game I would in turn be helping the company to help spread the word, get people excited. Now, to be clear, at no time was I ever instructed to praise the game, lie about my experience, be a corporate shill. I would never have gone for that (I actually quit a job at Gamestop, back when it was "Funco", because I was told by my manager to lie to the customers to get them to buy games). Instead it was sort of an acknowledgement that "we're doing this as a goodwill gesture to show the fans that this transition between companies will be okay, that we're trying our best to leave the series in good hands, and for helping us to spread the word you'll get to come to California for three days and get a rare opportunity to play and discuss a game that's still in development".
So I mean yeah, it's common for companies (video game, movie studios, Walmart, what have you) to try to reinforce a positive image and instill hope and retain faith in the customer, and a lot of the time it's perfectly honest. Just good PR, typical business strategy. But if in the end the results don't deliver, then yeah, people are going to start seeing through it. At that point it begins kind of a landslide - the more they (meaning any company, not specifically BHVR) seem to fail to deliver on their promises or even just hints, suggestions, solicitations of criticism, surveys, etc., the more they're going to ostracize their fans. When that happens a sort of black hole appears between the fans and the company, with both sides seeing the other as ungrateful. And from there, only one of two things can happen: The divide continues and things get worse, or someone says "wait a minute, the customers are upset, we need to own this and try to turn things around".
The end of the THQ / 2K story, as it currently stands, is that in 2019 they released one of the glitchiest, most imcomplete, broken, borderline unplayable catastrophe of a game. People quit, people were fired, the game was rightfully savaged by both fans and the entire gaming press alike, and for the first time in the series' 20 year history they went a year without publishing another edition of the game. Their complacency caught up to them. I again can't speak for BHVR, but I definitely feel that telling your audience that if they don't like it "they can go play Civ instead" is not the right direction to go.
-
@Anara said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148217#Comment_2148217
The problem was not my friend, I was on discord with him and we tried both doing a different generator.
The problem was both the killer and the two other survivors. The killer didnt tried to chase use, even in the 3 gen area, he just kicks again and again the generators with Overcharge (which my friend cant deal with and I missed some)
The two other survivors were swf too, and I found they were looking for the hatch with a pink key, but the hatch didnt spawn, we had to do one more generator, and nobody will died because the killer didnt chased us.
Okay, but you said "It was the worst experience of dbd Ive ever had. I dont want to play with my low rank friend anymore... I play with him because he is my friend, but clearly I lost my time during this game" which made it sound like you were partly blaming him. Maybe when he rises in rank you can have better games with him. But most matches aren't terrible like the one you had to go through.
-
@Ashlich said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148175#Comment_2148175
I get what you're saying and I'm glad someone here can be realistic about things. It's honestly just frustrating seeing the game go on with year old bugs they either refuse to fix or won't admit they can't. And then they pretty much flat out said to not expect any actual patches unless it's a chapter or mid chapter update which is pretty silly if you ask me to go that long in between balance changes. You need to be using your PTB to test ideas, get feedback, see what works and what doesn't. Right now it's a glorified trailer of whats to come in a couple weeks with minimal to no changes based on feedback.
The player surveys they ask us to fill out honestly feel like a middle finger as either they do it to appease the people that are upset and get them to think their voices are being heard or they're just turning a blind eye to a lot of things.
I appreciate the comment, if I'm realistic I think it's just because I enjoy playing devil's advocate and trying to see things from both sides and, as described, was fortunate enough to have experienced things from the other side firsthand.
You have every right to feel frustrated and I'm sorry that you are. I know that it isn't fun feeling (or knowing) that something that should be changed, something could be done to improve an experience, and just sitting there waiting for it to never happen. You ask, you beg, you plead, you try to raise awareness, but nothing ever gets done. I feel you. That isn't fun at all, and I've certainly been in that same position. There have been games in which just a few seemingly minor adjustments could have turned it from something agonizingly close to greatness to something of undeniably top tier quality. There have been times when something that seemed like the easiest, most common-sense decision was ignored in favor of a boneheaded decision that I felt almost had to have been made out of actual spite for reasons that I couldn't explain. It definitely happens. While my experience with this game so far hasn't left me feeling that way, I admittedly haven't been playing the game for thousands of hours. I can't speak for all of its frustrating intricacies the way that many of the rest of you can.
I CAN say something that you may find interesting though. Remember that I was invited to test an alpha build of one of THQ's yearly wrestling games in 2013? We were treated very nicely and encouraged to give them complete honesty about how we felt. They even had stacks of questionnaires about the game for us to provide feedback. Lastly they gathered us at a table with the company's executive producer and gave us an hour to chat about what we thought about not just the new game but the series as a whole. I dominated the conversation and drilled home exactly what I thought was good, what I thought was bad, what I thought could use change. Many of the others shared their thoughts clearly as well. We left feeling great about the opportunity (and I still look back on it fondly, it was a tremendous opportunity and a lot of fun). But do you want to guess how much of our feedback actually made it into the following games? None.
So believe me, I don't mean to undermine or discount your complaints or the specific complaints of others who may have them. I've told a developer to his FACE what I wanted to see, and still didn't get it. It sucks. Trust me, I know it sucks. I just wish that the fanbase in general could be more articulate and less judgmental about their complaints. Instead of saying "these developers are idiots", or "they don't care", etc., which if anything is going to LESSEN the chance of them listening, I wish that more people shared their criticism in a more polite, more productive manner.
Now, do I also wish that the developers spent more time, or maybe appointed someone to start spending time, interacting with the fans and trying to bridge that gap and make sure that the complaints are heard? Definitely.
-
@Northener1907 said:
Huntress. She lost her mom when she was child. She was alone all time. She grew up wild. Little girls was last part of her humanity. She wanted baby girl, wanted protect them but she lost them because she did not know anything about children. I really felt sad for her when i read her story.
You feel the same way about her story that I do.
-
My longest two games were 29 and 24 minutes, respectively. I loved them both, they were long because they were highly competitive. Extremely back and forth. For whatever it's worth my shortest (immediate slaughters, always because the killer spawned way too close to me) were about three minutes, my average (win or lose) is about ten.
I couldn't even imagine a game going for an hour. I actually agree with the idea of having an endgame collapse at the 30 minute mark (without the doors opening - both the killer and the survivor are simply forced to do their thing and if they can't do so then boom, when the EGC finished up then the game is over and the points tallied). This is the second time in almost as few days that I've read about someone having a miserable experience because someone else, intentionally or otherwise, forced a needlessly long match.
My question though (forgive me if this has been asked, I didn't read all the responses) is why don't you just talk to your friend, help them to understand the game better, etc.? It's your own business but it's a shame to not be able to enjoy a game with your friend just because they don't happen to know how to play it well.
-
Realistically, I think that the matchmaking system needs to be sorted ASAP. I've read here that the system is based on total amount of time played, which I find totally befuddling, but no one has corrected me. Players should be teamed with, and go up against, players of equal skill. How to go about that, I don't know (I would assume just win/loss records, like most other games), but the current system - which sees people in the high teens facing people in the low single digits - is just wrong.
I also wish that the map algorithm was a bit different. Realms that have only one map should have as much chance of showing up as maps that have five. While I've noticed a strangely more balanced ratio over the last week or so, I still get Coldwind, MacMillan, and Autohaven the most and still see Hawkins, Haddonfield, and the hospital the least. A while ago someone suggested that the way it should work is not simply randomizing each map, but randomizing each REALM. It was a good idea.
It would be great if the queues didn't take forever for survivors in the evening (US Central time, anyway). I've been told that this is the indirect result of SWF, so if anything could be done to alleviate the issue in this respect it would be great.
I don't really experience bugs on either the PC or the Switch Lite (and I'll take this opportunity to remind Switch players that the game supposedly runs better in portable form) but many have claimed that the Switch version has a lot of problems. These need to be addressed.
I don't necessarily mind perk tiers but I do think that the bloodweb should truly randomize them. If I spend 40 levels of grinding to teach someone's perk, it shouldn't take getting THAT character to the same level in order to get the unlocked perk. Let me have a chance of getting something crappy at a high level and something rare at a low level.
EVERYTHING should have fair counterplay. No one should ever be required to only use certain perks in order to have a reasonable chance against someone else (whether that other person is also relying on perks or not).
Survivors should not be all but forced to play aggressively to get decent points. In my last game I repaired three of the four fixed generators and lasted longer than the other three survivors, only being encountered by the killer as I tried to find the fifth one. Because I wasn't "brave" or "altruistic" I got the lowest points of everyone in the match, a mere 5.7K BP. I was punished for doing a good job of trying to help my team win as they stacked up the points for repeatedly getting beaten and hooked.
Survivors should also have some kind of sympathy reward for sitting on the hooks being facecamped or when all remaining survivors are left on the ground to bleed out. Not to punish the killer - nothing should be done to stop the killer's right to play this way - but to discourage the survivor from disconnecting and also compensate them to a small degree for spending much of the match unable to actually play.
Killers and survivors should never be so close to each other at the start of a match that a chase can happen within ten or twenty seconds of the start of the match. Everyone should have the chance to get their bearings before an encounter. If that means also not spawning any survivors near generators, so be it.
That's all I can think of at the moment. I'm sure that I'd also have some killer requests if I played that side more often.
-
Speak of the devil, and he shall appear.
-
@Jarol said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2147216#Comment_2147216
I say that this individual knows absolutely nothing of the slasher genre and even more to incinuate that Jason in Dead by Daylight is exaggerated, but is it not exaggerated to see a murderer dressed as chicken in DbD? Obviously any slasher fits only that people don't want them for personal reasons. Above all Jason is known as the king of slashers and should be in this game.
Technically not the first (very close, but that would be Myers. The case could even be made for Robert Mitchum in Night of the Hunter, who on a personal level I would love to see in this game but in all realistic practicality has no business being in it), but Jason is easily the most iconic of the classic slashers. I hope that with the collapse of the F13 game BHVR will be able to snag him someday, but the very reason for that collapse makes such a thing sadly unlikely.
As for Pennywise there's no reason he couldn't be in Dead By Daylight. The Entity saw that it was a powerful cosmic being that preyed on fear to make its human feasts more tasty, and offered it as much food as it could eat as long as it decided on a single form so that The Entity couldn't be tricked by it. Boom, there's an easy story right there (I'm not saying the best, I'm just saying that coming up with an excuse to get IT into the game wouldn't be any more difficult than any other character).
-
@Ashlich said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148145#Comment_2148145
Honestly? There's a lot they COULD do and realistically should. They have a PTB for these exact things but they frequently just never do. They push their latest chapter release to it for a 2-3 week "demo" and never really take much of the feedback given to heart. So while yes it could be harder to balance out a game of this size, we just never see them really "trying".
Well, that's a subjective viewpoint. I'm not saying that I totally disagree - I've been complaining a lot about how mystifying it is (to me) that people everywhere say that The Spirit needs a nerf but they ignore that and give random (in my opinion OP) buffs to The Wraith instead.
The problem is that, as human beings, familiarity breeds complacency. As the players get more accustomed to the game being a certain way, they get angry if the things that don't like aren't addressed and / or the things that they want aren't provided. On the developer's side, it's virtually impossible to take a lot of the criticism seriously if there are a lot of players and money rolling in.
I'm not saying that either side is "wrong" - the truth, as if often the case, lies somewhere in the middle - I'm just saying that overly finicky players plus overly exasperated developers equals "you can either enjoy the game as it is or play something else".
It would be great if there was more transparency from the devs, more direct interaction with the fans, but again - and I honestly hate to say this again but it's true - I've been involved in that and it's usually a huge mess. The second that someone with any say in the game's development pops into the game's official forum they're deluged with a rapidly expanding thread of requests, demands for answers, criticism, stupid questions, fans arguing with each other, etc. I'm not trying to put everything on "the fans", many of whom are perfectly decent and well-behaved people (here and otherwise). I'm just saying that coming to the hornet's nest will usually leave a game developer stung, so they tend to try to kind of stay at arm's length and view statistics, solicit information when they feel it's necessary, etc. I know it can be frustrating - remember, I've been in your shoes too, not just "theirs" - but it tends to be a relatively neutral way of keeping the gears turning.
-
Someone in another thread called Self-Care a "noob trap". I'm sad to find myself agreeing with that. Self-care takes literally, without exaggeration. 7.4 hours to be successful. That's way too long when a medkit can do it in like 15 seconds. I really loved Claudette's healing / restorative botanist theme (and still do for the most part) but was bummed when I saw how impractical Self-Care is, even at full tier.
-
I actually tend to forget that the hatch even exists. I pretty much always go for the exit gates, even to my own detriment (I really should learn that when the killer is running the gates there's often a potentially safer solution).
-
@Ashlich said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148104#Comment_2148104
Our main gripes are with the balance employees and probably the bug fixing department, if one even exists here. Art, Music, etc are all great but when it just keeps consistently being that same department that can't pull their heads out of their asses you can see why a lot of people are volatile.
You have a right to feel the way that you do. To me it's less a matter of the balancing team (or whomever has the responsibility to oversee that part of the game) being incompetent and more about trying to find a perfect middle ground in a game that has such a massive playerbase (which, in all fairness, is comprised of many people who just complain) and an astounding amount of specific in-game variables.
A game of Pac-Man can feel imbalanced because the ghosts are way too fast. Easy fix. A game of Dead By Daylight feeling imbalanced? There's probably 500 different things to consider tweaking. And when they do, the people who weren't calling the game imbalanced are going to start.
-
@Jasix said:
Pssst you can disable chat - it makes the game way more enjoyable.
Are PLAYERS toxic - yep killer and survivors. Back when I had chat on I would get "toxic" comments from both sides as I play both sides 50/50. But then I made a decision to disable chat and have no regrets. End game chat does nothing for the game. I decided instead of getting offended about stupid people on the internet - I would be proactive and just stop reading it.
Tada.
I learned a long time ago that comments from random strangers on the internet do nothing to me. It takes a great deal of concentrated effort from someone who's had a long history of "knowing" me to say anything that actually gets me riled up in real life. They don't matter. Their opinions don't matter. I'll never encounter them in real life, they have no effect on mine.
Crappy behavior during a match bothers me because that directly interferes with my ability to enjoy the game. Telling someone to off themselves bothers me in principle because I know that a lot of vulnerable people have taken such advice from some online idiot. Beyond that, a person can say whatever they want and it's not going to ruin my day. Whatever it is I'm sure I've heard worse from people who meant just as little. Ya gotta learn to just shrug people like that off, or just toy with them if you feel so inclined. If someone says "gg ez" say "thanks!" just to enjoy the fact that they either don't understand that you're messing with them or that they're probably laughing at your response thinking that you're dumb when in fact you're the winner for having played THEM. If someone says "You suck" say "Thanks but I don't take requests". If someone calls you cheap say "You couldn't afford me, honey".
You know? Silly crap like that. People who throw out juvenile insults cannot stand having their own taunts turned back against them. If you don't want to turn off chat and someone tries to get you, just zing 'em back and quit the match with a chuckle. Just don't say anything that will get you banned, it's not worth going to that level.
-
As a survivor main I myself would like to just be consistently matched up with other survivor solos. Finding myself thrown in with a team makes it awkward for me, probably lame for them, and almost assuredly leads the killer to assume that I'm going to be just as much of a troublemaker as the others are.
-
@TiltedBandy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148083#Comment_2148083
I'n wack huh? Say that to all the streamers that put wraith on low tier that have 6k hrs or even more. Otzdarva for example, put him in low tier before trapper and he is strong, very strong.
I'm referring to the changes that were applied to The Wraith just like a week ago. People haven't played 6 thousand hours against him.
Besides, I don't care about streamers or their own subjective opinions. I care about my own experiences. Everyone says that The Nurse is the most difficult and stressful killer to face, my matches against her suggest differently.
...For what it's worth I called you "wack" as a joke but your response to that legitimately made me laugh (I'm being serious, no sarcasm or actual offense intended). XD
-
@Ashlich said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148087#Comment_2148087
No, a lot of us are really wondering what actually goes on at this 600 Employee company. This is literally their only game but it's always going to be one thin thread being pulled to destroy it type deal. I honestly cannot see how their balance testing employees still have a job right now.
I mean, when I was doing stuff with THQ I spoke to the developers and in particular the PR people / community managers on a regular basis and I often felt really bad for them. They tried really hard to make everybody happy but no matter what they were slammed for pretty much everything that they did or didn't do. It was lose-lose. Make a change, piss a bunch of people off. Make a different change, piss of the other people. It was especially bad for the people who had to be the spokesperson, the ones who had to deliver news or provide only limited information, etc. In 2013 I and a handful of other "influencers" were given access to that year's alpha build of the game and got to tell people what we thought of the experience. Even people who'd formerly had nothing but good things to say about me immediately jumped to the conclusion that I was on the take, that I was now just a corporate shill who was paid off to make excuses for the company's failures, and that the upcoming game would actually be crap (none of which was actually true). There was only one person who got out of the situation with zero ######### given.
I guess what I'm saying is that I've been in the unique position of being a gamer who's also been on the other side. Audiences are SO demanding, SO entitled, SO argumentative, SO fickle, you really don't realize just how bad it can get until you're the one having to try to calm it all down. I'm not saying that is applies to you guys or even anyone specific at all, I just have firsthand experience dealing with trying to keep the peace among a very large group of very outspoken fans of a very big game franchise. It honestly seemed like nothing made anyone happy, and seeing the developers face to face and watching their expressions when they say things like "we really thought people would like this" gives one a lot of perspective.
Honestly, given all the working parts that go into making this game function, I think that it's largely a success. Is it perfect? No, but no game really is. Could it use some work? Yes, of course, but the problem is that one person's fix is another person's breakage. You don't get millions of people playing a game like this for half a decade unless it's fun. There are plenty of other things to do in life. I'm always willing to hear out and discuss objective criticism of the game (as it is sometimes totally warranted) but I think that a lot of people brush aside the amount of work and attention that the developers have been giving this game just because it is not, to their tastes, 100 percent precisely what they want.
-
I like the thought that a lot of you are giving this question. It's been interesting to see that most of the killers are seen as sympathetic, which is cool.
@Khar said:
Freddy.
He has to spend the rest of his nightmarish existence knowing he'll never be the Robert Englund version.
Okay, I laughed, lol. But honestly given that Englund's Freddy has been basically erased from New Line / WB's history in favor of the Dr. Seuss-looking one from the remake I think it's fair to say that WE are the ones who deserve sympathy.
-
@glitchboi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148070#Comment_2148070
I mean, I'm kinda glad people see Wraith as OP now. Bing-bong man is finally getting the love he deserves.
I like the character himself, but now facing him just feels consistently cheap. "Okay, match has started, I'm just going to walk over h- oh look, I caught a .07 second glimpse of The Wraith's blur, started to run, but he was too close and gave no warning so he caught up to me with no trouble anyway. Good thing I don't need special perks or anything to have a fair chance in a situation like this".
I have no clue why it was decided to ignore the tens of billions of requests to nerf the Spirit and figured "nah, let's just make this other killer The Predator instead". Anyway sorry, I've complained enough. I don't mean to hijack the thread.
-
I feel like I'm moderating the THQ forums again. Everyone rejoiced when that company went under and was bought by 2K games. "Thank god! A competent developer who will listen to the fans!" they all screamed.
They say very different things today.
-
@TiltedBandy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2148066#Comment_2148066
please, don't tell me that wraith is high tier now, I'm begging you, I read enough about that Meg
To me he is. The bell was basically the only reliable counter anyone had to being beaned out of absolutely nowhere with him, now it's gone. How much higher tier can a character get than someone who's super fast, invisible, AND silent? How could they possibly make the character's base power any better than it currently is?
If you consider him low tier you straight-up wack, yo.
-
Some of the films they've licensed have had far, far, FAR more exposure than Resident Evil. Freddy has been recognized as a pop culture icon by millions of people for going on forty years. Yes, there's lots of crossover between RE fans and DBD fans (myself included in that group) and yes, RE is a huge coup for this game. Any game is likely to benefit more from crossing over with other games as opposed to movies, just by the general nature of the medium. Gamers are more likely to recognize other games than they are to recognize movies. But I wouldn't call RE, or any game for that matter, DBD's biggest license in terms of overall recognition or mass appeal.
In other words, yes, RE is a great fit for this series and one of the better licenses they could have gotten, but characters like Freddy (and Jason, if they were somehow able to get him) are more famous overall.
-
Given his recent unnecessary buffs I'm stressed enough as it is when facing the Wraith.
-
@Ryan489x said:
None of them.
if I had to pick one I'd say spirit she was murdered by her father and thrown out the window.
I think that Spirit is one of the most sympathetic because she literally didn't even do anything wrong. She came home to see her mother dead, then ran in terror from her father who sliced HER apart too. She died completely innocent. Only in death did she become evil.
-
@Zixology said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2147981#Comment_2147981
Yep. It's all too common.
When this happens more than twice in a row, I just stand still and hope it ends soon without me getting farmed.
I honestly don't care if I win or lose. I mean to an extent, sure. I'd like those extra winning points, and sometimes it seems like I try really hard, get to be the last survivor, have victory (the exit gates) RIGHT in my hands, and I lose the whole 15-minute match by mere seconds because the killer caught up just in time. That's a bummer. But hey, I at least got to PLAY.
Hearing the terror radius within literally half a minute or less of starting a game? Not even knowing which direction to go or whether to run, hide or sneak because you not only don't know who you're against, where they are, whether they've seen you, but also have no clue as to how the map is even arranged yet? Getting hit, chased and hooked before the first minute of the game has even passed? That's ridiculous. It's legit unfair. Just as a killer shouldn't always be set as far away as possible from all four survivors, no survivor should ever be placed within a few hundred feet of the killer.
-
@Zixology said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2147934#Comment_2147934
Agreed. Stealth should be rewarded.
The game rewards too much "in your face" playstyles. Not that those are bad or wrong. Everyone plays differently. But good stealth should be rewarded with more than +13 boldness.
Exactly.
I understand the killer mains who equate "stealthy" with "hiding". I totally do. I've had a few survivor matches where one of my teammates literally just camped all match, moving just enough to avoid the crows, and / or moved from hiding place to hiding place until we were all essentially whittled away and they could just await the hatch. Believe me you guys, other survivors hate that as much as you do.
But, there are also a lot of killer mains (many of whom gave their thoughts in a thread about stealthy play a day or so back) who seemed to just despise anybody who used stealth at all, they said - more or less - that they found the game boring unless the survivors were running around more, revealing themselves more, allowing themselves to be chased more. I understand that too, I honestly do. But to me there's a real dividing line between "this person is basically AFK for a cheap win" and "this person is successfully eluding me and I don't like it".
Sometimes I gen rush, sometimes I spend more time focusing on altruism, it really just comes down to instinct based on the killer I face, the teammates I get, and how everyone else is playing. I try to find a balance. But for me, sneaking and trying to avoid capture is the funnest part of the game. I'll take it over the looping game ten times out of ten. And that's fine, neither side is "wrong". Everyone has their playstyle. As long as they aren't breaking the rules, everyone should be allowed to play how they like.
So yeah, it was really kind of a smack in the face to see that even though I did most of the actual work, completed most of the actual progress, and survived longer than any of the of the others, I got the least amount of points. I was punished for playing carefully. That sucks.
-
Good answers, I considered all of these as well.
-
I have some sort of tremendously bad luck of being caught and chased by the killer within the first ten to twenty seconds of my match. No joke. This happens probably at least 6 or 7 times out of every 10 games. Doesn't matter if I sneak. Doesn't matter if I run. Doesn't matter if I lock onto the first generator I see. Doesn't matter if I try to get to the opposite end of the map. Doesn't matter if I walk along the walls. Doesn't matter if I try to take a meandering path down the middle. Doesn't matter what I do. I cannot tell you how many times I am honed in on by the killer almost immediately after the match starts, as if we were spawned with him (or her) standing on a hill a few hundred feet behind me. I mean hell, last time I played Midwich the killer was literally in the next room over and caught me as soon as I walked out.
It's become so inexplicably common that I literally wonder if my game is bugged, there's some secret game mechanic in place to punish me for something I may or may not have done, or if I there's just ONE good strategy to stop this from happening and I haven't discovered it yet. I cannot emphasize enough how incredibly frustrating it is. Pretty much every other match my heart sinks as I try to just move around and START to accomplish something only for the chase music to come rapidly running in. I sigh. "Again, really"?
So yeah, it's gotten to the point where I'd love to just hit a button that says "you win, take an arbitrary amount of victory points, let me just move on to a different match" whenever this happens. Which is virtually all the time.
-
Wow, I'm really surprised at how many people think that Meg needs work. I think she's very attractive. With her hair down and her midriff on display in the fortune teller outfit (or wearing the skinny jeans that reveal her dimples of Venus) she is the embodiment of feminine beauty. To me her face and body shape is extremely pretty in a realistic way, a way that you'd actually see on someone in real life rather than the fake, overly made-up plasticized Hollywood type of pretty.
If they drastically change her I'm going to be really disappointed.
-
This is a bit off-topic in a way but, regarding the amount of work and the relative lack of reward, I had a match today in which I was the last survivor - wasn't even seen by the killer until the last generator left to be repaired, and three of those I repaired by myself with no help. When the game was over I got like 6,000 BP, or not even enough to replace the items I took into the match.
It seems silly to me that a survivor who manages to elude the killer until the very end of the match AND do more than half of the generator work winds up being the person with, by far, the lowest score in the game. I guess I was supposed to do a bunch of unhooks in front of the killer and get knocked down five or six times in order to demonstrate to the game that I was single-handedly winning the match for my team.
-
I have bad luck with the Clown. Almost every one that I've faced has been really, really good. I've rarely encountered one who had any real problem getting 4Ks.
By contrast everyone says that The Nurse is way too powerful but for some reason I usually don't have much trouble against her. Luck of the draw and different playstyles, I suppose.
-
I apparently haven't played killer enough to notice any consistent patterns of annoying behavior based on the character chosen. It's about the player, not the player's avatar. So, for me, if I do ever single anybody out it's the one who's acting like a jackass. Don't care which character they're using.