oxygen
oxygen
About
- Username
- oxygen
- Joined
- Visits
- 8,170
- Last Active
Comments
-
I mean yeah you're not wrong, as I'm sure the actual hitboxes are just fine. At most they might be a bit wacky if they don't fully match the new survivor animations or something.
But there's certainly something up with ... something. Not sure if it's hit validation, "general" lag compensation or something else but there's some pretty bizarre hits happening. I've seen a lot of killers swing (too) early more often than before too, as if survivors appear closer than they really are or something. Sometimes it leads to wacky hits, sometimes it leads to a whiff - either way it's happening more often than it used to in my experience.
-
That has nothing to do with the UI/HUD and everything to do with how the game handles non-standard aspect ratios. Both the more square ones people use for stretched and the ones found on ultra wide monitors, both look and behave weird with how the game currently works.
Considering they said in the recent Q&A that ultrawide support isn't something they're working on at the moment I wouldn't expect it to be changed any time soon. As that would involve some sort of attempt to make the game have a more consistent look or at least make it stretch in a more normal way (more horizontally as opposed to vertically) on "non standard" aspect ratios, which would probably include improvements to ratios significantly bigger and smaller than the more standard 16:9 and 16:10 ones.
-
In my experience they're usually just normal players that decided to stream honestly.
And hey, I like reviewing my gameplay from a different perspective afterwards. It's like a replay system or manually recording every match, but Twitch does all the work for me 😄. Quite educational and fun to get to see your gameplay from the view of the opponent(s) honestly.
-
Of course it would be best if it was possible to determine with 100% certainty when a disconnect was intentional and when it wasn't, but that's not the case.
So that leaves you with two options basically.
- A system that actually does something but will lead to some "collateral damage" in cases of connection hiccups or crashes.
- A system that gives the benefit of the doubt and is wide open for abuse.
If you let connection time-outs dodge a DC penalty for example people WILL disconnect their internet on purpose, either by reconnecting for a software method or the good old ethernet cord yank for a hardware method. And with the sheer volume of disconnecting leading up to the systems implementation in DBD it was obvious that a system with a chance to actually do something was needed.
-
I play all of them but some are more common than average and some are less.
More commonly used: Huntress, Doc, Trapper, Blight. Just find them the most fun.
Less commonly used: Spirit, Hag, Pyramid Head. Don't find their powers very fun to use and as a result I don't play them much.
-
I assume the "healing" condition refers to the player with DS active doing the healing, as it would be really dumb if the person unhooking you healing you for 0.0003548 nanoseconds deactivated your DS. Which is why I assume that's not what it's about 😄
Beyond that, it's pretty much what I'd expect as something like this has without a doubt been the most popular suggestion from what I've seen. Personally happy they didn't include the "another survivor gets hooked" condition (so the deactivation conditions are all things the survivor in question have to actively do for them to happen) or try to tie anything to the easily exploitable chase detection system as well.
-
They can just not attempt the skillcheck and save it for later anyway though.
Hitting or failing the skillcheck deactivates the perk. Not even attempting it (not hitting spacebar/the skillcheck button and letting the skillcheck expire) doesn't consume the single use of the perk.
EDIT: lol not surprised that in the quick minute or so I got distraced this was pointed out by others, but yeah
-
@Klakky said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1915704#Comment_1915704
Hit validation just ruined it, I have over 2 dozen times( and I very rarely play survivor) 20 ping most of the time and I get hit waaay too far from the window I vaulted, it was much better before it has nothing to do with VPN
Yeah I've certainly heard a lot of bad about it and can't say much about how it works as I personally don't end up in high-latency lobbies myself, but it seemed like the idea behind it was to make sure any disadvantages that come with high latency fall on the player(s) that actually have latency. The idea is good, but sure seems like it needs a lot more work.
I agree with the idea and goal behind it but it obviously has to work properly to be good. And I'm fully aware it isn't intended as an anti-VPN "abuse" feature, that's just a source potential source of high latency like any other.
EDIT: Especially needs more work if it causes weird behavior even with lower latency. Again, idea good execution not so much for now.
-
Far better idea to make it so high latency is always a disadvantage than trying to mess with VPNs in particular. That's the goal of the hit validation system at least.
If someone VPNs to a different city or something for basic privacy purposes or even to a nearby country to avoid country-specific restrictions it won't be the end of the world for them. Meanwhile someone that VPNs as far away as possible specifically to mess with their latency will have trouble. There's all sorts of perfectly valid reasons to use a VPN so it's better to do it that way.
And of course that will still cause some "collateral damage". People in very sparsely populated regions, people in areas with no nearby servers. But just like something like the DC penalty system, there will always be some collateral damage with perfectly innocent people getting hit with it. Best that can be done is try to minimize that, as it will always happen.
-
The ones that lead to requests or even demands for things that quite simply will never ever happen. Think stuff like "ban people for camping" and "remove SWF".
-
Team Fortress 2.
But it still probably takes up a bit more of my time than DBD does to be fair.
-
Because looking even partially down can at best make your blink shorter and at worst yeet you into the basement or onto a lower floor. Even a slight decrease in range can throw off your muscle memory.
Looking up has no negative effects unless there's a higher elevated floor at the destination of your blink.
By flicking up you make sure you're not looking even 1 degree "down" instead of straight ahead.
-
When you trigger a Hag trap before you even know it's Hag.
Alternatively, when you're just minding your own business and not even chasing someone and suddenly a pallet bonks you on the head.
-
Use whatever you want and ignore people that attack you for using perks they dislike. If they can't focus on the perks instead of people using them, they're already being unreasonable and pretty scrubby.
Just don't complain about players if someone else uses something you dislike, it obviously goes both ways.
-
It's a good perk for genuine teams, which is why it has the place it has in tournament play.
Most survivors (no matter if they're SWF or not, but even 4mans) fit the definition of "group" more than "team". More of a collection of people coordinating individual efforts than a true team all working towards an identical, mutual goal that's more important than individual experiences.
That is when Camaraderie can be good. But that's a playstyle that few people go all out with outside of tournaments (where of course people will do whatever it takes to win as a team), as most will probably find it more boring than the alternatives.
-
So what happens if it's a 3man + a solo? So that solo player just randomly gets 3 teammates with -45% action speed?
While I personally think mechanical nerfs are solidly in never ever territory when it comes to SWF, if that approach was to be followed the penalties would be way lower than 15%. And even then I really can't see it even being considered seriously by the devs.
There's a reason most discussion surrounds the "close the gap" approach. It's not a perfect solution either (a perfect solution does not exist) but it actually has a non-zero probability of even being considered and explored.
-
What exactly am I supposed to do differently if a killer loses track of me during a chase and disconnects as a result? Or an entirely different survivor on the other side of the map breaks their totem early and they disconnect as a result?
I don't want anyone to disconnect or have a bad time, but beyond avoiding actively being an annoying player there's a limit to how much an individual player can do to prevent it.
-
@JPA said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1905702#Comment_1905702
If you D/C in the loading screen does it still waste their offering?
No, if a game is "cancelled" because someone fails to load in all offerings and other consumable things are returned unless something has changed.
-
Because I still find it fun the overwhelming majority of the time.
Maybe I just care less about the "bad matches" than the average, maybe it's because I don't main the game and barely play anything else, maybe it's something else - I just enjoy my time playing the game more or less no matter what happens.
-
Not really, I haven't really had a "main game" since I basically only played TF2 day in and day out for years.
I play DBD and TF2 about equally, but I also play other games. Currently mostly Escape from Tarkov and Stellaris, but with a bit of Rimworld, Rust, Call of Duty: Cold War here and there as well.
-
@Klakky said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1902738#Comment_1902738
It's like saying
"I didn't mean to steal that money officer but the cash was there and the guard looked away it's not my fault, it's the banks fault for letting me get that close, so u shouldn't arrest me "
Stealing is against the law, the thing being discussed in this thread isn't against the rules.
Don't get me wrong, I think the fact it's possible and that there genuinely isn't much of a counter beyond "just leave them lol" or "just wait until their flashlights run out of battery lol" if the two survivors do it perfectly every time is pretty stupid. But that's on the game, not the players. I'll happily change my stance on this if a dev (or anyone in a position to actually decide the rules) comes in here and says it's considered some sort of undesirable exploit or something, but I don't see that happening.
-
Not against any rules whatsoever, reporting it won't do anything.
If you want to blame anyone/anything for that, this is a situation where there's no other option than blaming the game for letting it happen in the first place, not players doing it.
-
Nothing that happens in-match can ever get close to what someone that's really angry and/or unpleasant in general might type in chat after the match, to me this isn't even a question.
If I had to pick an in-game action it'd be letting people bleed out on purpose for no tactical reason whatsoever though. Just a pointless waste of time just like someone waiting in the gate with the intention of leaving before any points can even be exchanged, but just like that it ultimately has no other match impact than being a waste of time.
-
You can make your Steam name pretty much whatever you want. Same for the link to your Steam profile.
So probably, if you want.
-
If I end up on a server where I have really high latency I'll probably dodge just like with killer.
Besides that, can't say I can remember doing so. I would if I ran into someone I recently saw either blatantly intentionally sandbag or straight up cheat, but I haven't had that happen yet. If someone "trolls" from the start of the game I'll assume they might do it again, and I have no interest in being in a match with a cheater if I can help it.
And by cheater I mean undeniable obvious stuff like speedhacks, godmode or instantly walking through the gate at the start of the match, that sorta thing. Which in itself is something I see very very rarely.
-
Ohh, I can only pick one option? I like Ace, Kate, Bill and Dwight quite equally.
But gonna give the vote to my man Ace, as if I had to pick one of them it'd probably be him. Really like what they've done for him cosmetic wise.
-
I'll try to find a new lobby if I somehow ended up on a server where I have bad latency.
But that's honestly the only thing I check before just tabbing out until I hear the sound of the start-of-match camera spin.
-
Mickey? Have you considered Goofy instead.
Purely because getting chased around by him sounds completely abusrd in a very strange way. And he should be the tallest killer as well of course.
And if we're keeping it uh, slightly more serious I second the idea of something Scooby Doo-like. Either straight outta that IP or something original that looks like a villain lifted straight from a Scooby Doo episode. At least it's kinda horror related 😄
-
I once had someone accuse me of cheating because they didn't know how Poised worked, and it activated at the perfect time in a chase to completely lose them. But once I said they should read what the perk does they got it and we both had a laugh at it 😄. And also had someone mad about Lithe on Lery's... when they played the offering to go to that map. Lucky me I guess.
And also, Dark Devotion. Hilarious perk when it works but someone that got grabbed wasn't happy. And also someone that thought Dead Man's Switch was "lame" for some reason.
-
@AnnoyedAtTheGame said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/209218/add-in-game-chat-for-console
Do you understand how over powered every survivor will be if comms was in this game?
Having a few matches against SWF with comms every few matches is ok but not every single match using comms is not what this game needs. How many killers do you think will stop playing killer side if comms was permanently put in this game on console?
We don't need survivors buffing anymore than what they already are right now. survivors needs nerfing.
.. they're not talking about voice chat or in-match communication, they're talking about pre-game lobby and post-game lobby text chat.
-
Anything people can do on their monitor (brightness, gamma, whatever it calls it) I don't even know if you could restrict even if you wanted to.
Nvidia Freestyle filters are either opt-in or opt-out, as there's games where they don't work or games where they used to work and then stop working. Escape From Tarkov is one example if I remember correctly, it instead opted for its own in-game postprocessing filter system that the devs had more control of the parameters of so people couldn't go as far with visual tweaks.
@Avilgus said:
SWF plays with comms, but no one talk about it.
People talk about it all the time, but most people are aware that trying to go after voip apps/party chat functions is a complete waste of time. Any methods that could stop it would be extremely unpopular and considered invasive, yet perfectly circumventable for players that want to do it No developer would try to mess with it, and on some platforms they're probably not even allowed to do so if they want to offer their game on said platform.
-
I'm not colourblind so I can't claim to have any experience with the colours used being good choices or not, but looks really good. Sticks to the same "red-ish" sort of color that still fits the game nicely 👍️
-
Pretty rare honestly, most of the time it's either just silent or just the usual ggs with nothing less nor more to it.
-
When it comes to discussing changes to the perk that sort of idea seems to be the most favored one to me. Sure there's some that don't want it changed at all (or even buffed), just like there's some that would only truly be content with the complete removal of the perk. But it feels like most people would go for some sort of anti-tunneling specialization change if they had to change it and got to decide exactly how it gets changed.
-
@landromat said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1885443#Comment_1885443
But party play will literally stay as it is, solo survivors will be able to get bloodpoints. I don't see any party play discourage
If someone wants the bloodpoints but enjoy the game a lot less unless playing with 1 or more other people, that will feel discouraging when the game tells them they can't get it the way they've always preferred to play the game.
Reward desired behavior instead of withholding rewards to try to make people engage in the behavior in question. It might seem like the same thing on paper, but the "feel" of something like offering an extra bonus on top for solo players (like extra bloodpoints on top of the 250k) would be a much better option.
-
If you want to encourage solo play, you need to do it in a way that can't be said to directly discourage party play. Because that's something no developer of a multiplayer game in the year 2021 would ever do even in their wildest dreams.
-
If it in any way isn't "as good" as third party applications/party chat, it can't in any way be viewed in the same way from a balancing perspective. Ever. It would be exclusively for fun, messing about (and lets be real) trash talking. If you want it to be taken into account in any way from a balance perspective it has to be 100% unrestricted in-game voice chat that tries to work just like getting in a Discord call or a PS/Xbox party chat works.
And I don't even have the energy to touch on the idea of banning the use of third-party VOIP applications and party chat functions. It's so far into NEVER EVER territory in 2021 multiplayer gaming that it's not even worth discussing, no nicer way to put it. Hell, the devs probably wouldn't even be allowed to do anything like that on consoles, they reaaaaally don't like their party chat functions being messed with (especially Xbox).
-
It happens, best to just remember any obnoxious experience you encounter is because of obnoxious players and nothing more, nothing less. Not even obnoxious killers or survivors, but the individual human being behind the screen.
And little tip for the challenge you're talking about in the future if you want to make sure to get it.. if you have it, equip Stake Out 😄. Free great skillchecks for days unless you go against a sneaky killer.
-
@TragicSolitude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1883845#Comment_1883845
This is almost unavoidable due to negativity bias. It's pretty much built in to the human species.
I will say, I often get a lot of bad matches in a row, both as survivor and killer. I'll have match after match getting tunneled and camped. Or I'll have match after match of just miserable-to-play-against survivors. But then other days I'll have lots of good matches. It's one of those things.
Oh of course, it happens to everybody but I'm just saying it might have more of a (longer term) impact on some than others. Even though that probably does indeed have less to do with negativity bias itself and more to do with how irritable they are and how long they stay annoyed once something happens.
Put several people in the same annoying situation and some will "move on" from it faster than others. I certainly have anecdotal experience with people I've played with that point in that direction. Not claiming the people that move on faster are superior in some way, it's just people being different of course.
-
I'm sure some people are a bit more unlucky than others, but I'm also sure some people are simply more susceptible to negativity bias than others. To some one bad game can practically delete the memory of 20 "normal" games before it, no matter what that means to them. Others might get annoyed during the bad game, but they've already pretty much forgotten it by the time they're loading into another game.
-
I honestly can't remember last time I saw one, it was at some point last year probably around september or something. I don't run into them often at all, at least not obvious ones.
-
Top
- Huntress. Hatchets are fun and satisfying to use in general and she plays quite differently to the norm.
- Trapper. Just a classic to me, and feels good when your setup pays off.
- Doctor. Honestly don't know, just enjoy playing him. Hearing him laugh and giggle all the time certainly helps I guess.
Bottom
- Spirit. I simply don't like how she plays and always wish I was playing another killer.
- Ghostface. Just don't like how it's seemingly a coinflip that decides if a survivor can stare into my soul and fail to reveal me, or if they can reveal me through a series of wormholes without issue.
- Plague. Again, just don't have much of an enjoyable time playing as her even if I do well.
-
The way she plays isn't for everyone. I simply don't find her very enjoyable to play and even though I'm not entirely sure why I just have a more enjoyable time playing something else, so I don't play her.
It's not as extreme as with something like Hag or Nurse, but she does play in a very specific way and if you don't enjoy that way you're not gonna enjoy playing as her.
-
It's not technically holding the game hostage as there is a way out besides disconnecting (the other survivors leaving), but in that particular situation it is a reportable offense based on what I've seen in posts from the devs in other threads about similar situations.
Blocking to kill with EGC is only allowed if EGC has already started, I'm pretty sure.
-
Yes. Sometimes acting 100% certain it has to be a 4man team because I guess any other combination of 4 survivors is incapable of doing generators when they're not being threatened whatsoever (as the killer is obviously chasing one person for ages).
It's just scrubby "If I blame X, it wasn't my fault, so I didn't really lose!" behavior, no different to a survivor just throwing out "camper tunneler" when nothing like that even happened. The opponent(s) didn't win in a way they approve of, therefore they didn't really win and the person in question didn't really lose. Shrug and move on, it's a thing some gamers do no matter the role, genre or game they're playing.
-
Agreed. And it's completely absurd to claim it shouldn't be a thing because it might give non-colourblind people some sort of advantage when stuff like Nvidia Filters exist and are perfectly legal.
-
I've been called both a killer and survivor main by people looking to invalidate my opinion, so obviously I have a mixed set of opinions 😄
Depends, for me it sorta goes in cycles. For 3 weeks I might play 90% killer, then for the next 2 weeks I pretty much only play survivor. Sometimes the periods are shorter, sometimes they're longer. Sometimes I play them more equally.
So... depends on when you ask. Right now I'm pretty balanced and I'd say it's something like 60/40 survivor/killer.
-
If you mean streamsniping, I've never done so or wanted to do so. I just play normally honestly.
But I do like seeing matches from another player's perspective, no matter if it's me as killer vs them as survivor, or me as survivor vs them as killer. It's interesting to see your own gameplay from a different perspective after the match is over, unlike some games that have "replay" features with perspective-switching included it's the only way you'll get it in DBD.
-
I don't mind them removing something that was unintended, but it should really be a built in accessibility option. Any microscopic "advantage" it might offer is so laughably small that it shouldn't even be an arguement honestly, hell while I have the same opinion on colourblind modes and that potential advantages from them should honestly be ignored for the benefit of colourblind people at least there's kinda an actual arguement to have there.
Until then, at least there's this great piece of advice here for PC players. No clue if an equivalent exists for consoles, if not that's only more of an arguement for adding it as an univeral accessibility feature.
@wojtech said:
Open Control panel -> Mouse -> Buttons Tab -> Select "Turn on ClickLock"
click settings to adjust accordingly
-
If you want to, bring it. Doesn't matter if it's because you just had a no-obsession game and it went like they often go or any other reason. If you're bringing it and using it primarily as an anti-tunneling tool the situations most people complain about will happen way less than if you aggressively use it.
Of course, some will complain even if they hit you down right off hook and get DS'd after insta-picking you up, but they're never gonna be happy with any change that the devs might realistically make to DS in the first place, so.. unlucky I guess.