pseudechis
pseudechis
About
- Username
- pseudechis
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
Eh I wouldn't want it.
There is far to much shared information at the moment. All the mystery, guesswork and thought is largely gone.
I think it would just be another piece of information cluttering an increasingly cluttered UI.
-
As others have said Kate Denison has good starter perks, windows of opportunity, dance with me, boil over are all good perks.
But also Meg with Quick and Quiet which lessens noise, sprint burst will give you distance so can have time to think where to run, adrenalin will save your butt by giving you back a health state once gens a powered. Base game survivor so you have her even without expansions.
Feng with lithe and technician, get a speed boost from vaults and reduce noise from gen repair can be a big help till you get good at hitting skill checks.
I find male survivors are really loud compared to most females so you tend to get found more, maybe its just me. So start with one of the girls.
Be sure to look around and get used to rotating the camera even in chase. Looking back at the killer can alert you on a mind game that would otherwise catch you out.
Lastly play killer, best way to excel at survivor is to play killer and see what works and what doesn't from the other side.
Above all have fun.
-
@Farya said:
Of course my statement wasn't meant to hit someones personality overall, or what kind of human being they are in real life. Sorry if it sounded that way. I only evalute things connected to the game.
Is it any less selfish to expect others to attenuate how they play because you brought an offering?
Its not unempathetic to play game how you like regardless of what offerings people bring, in fact that has nothing to do with empathy or lack thereof.
I just think people shouldn't care if others get bonus BP, even if they play a way they don't like. I consider it slightly envy or not begrudge someone something, if you say things like "I don't want to give my opponent BP, just make it so it's only for me!". Of course you don't have to expect to be pampered just because of the fact you brought a BP offering either. I just smell enviousness if people say they want offerings to be only personal. Because I think the Event offerings who give BP to everyone are a nice "celebration" and give a feeling of belonging together as a whole community on events.
It doesn't hurt you to not get maximum BP's for your offering either. "But I wasted the BP's" so you wasted an infinitely available resource which is given for free for simply playing the game, the sunk cost is so minor its barely measurable.
Yeah, it doesn't hurt me if I don't get max BP out of my offering. I never said that. OP did.
If they choose to and everyone gets heaps of points great, but if they play as they always would then that's neither selfish or unempathetic, its just gameplay and doesn't make them a bad person whom lacks empathy and generosity.
I am not saying that either. My "lack of empathy" post was just related to someones opinion to make the event offerings for one player only, because they don't want others to get BP out of it. For me, it's a nice bonus for "everyone" and I don't get mad if someone got more BP out of my offering than I myself did in a match. Sometimes that's how it goes.
Want to point out again, that's of course nothing personal, just my opinion on the question if event BP offerings should be one-player only or stay like they are, giving everyone in the match the extra BP.
Overall, everyone gets more BP if event cakes are used by more than one player often. Even if sometimes you are tunneled out fast. Better luck next match, when other players throw in their BP as well. It's nothing I get angry about. I am not the one saying: "Bleeeh make BP only for me! I don't want to give others the BP because i get tunneled out of the game fast!". I'm above that. Doesn't hurt me if I see other people get more out of something at the game, or their grass is greener than mine.
So, I think there was a little bit of misunderstanding about my last post. Might be because I have expressed myself wrong. Sometimes I auto translate words I am not sure about as well (like "empathy" or "envy") so that might have add up makeing it sound more harsh than it was meant to.
Sorry for that, and see you in the fog. Being it with or without event-cakes ✌️
Well thought out reply and I wasn't having a dig at you.
Just offering as counter perspective to the topic as a whole, as the concepts of people being selfish and/or unempathetic come up a lot in DBD.
I often find the rationale for such conclusions to be really weak, often overstating the problem (or its impact) or having very unrealistic expectations about the game to begin with.
The term "you" here as I used it was to address the more general idea behind why people make empathetic and generosity based arguments rather than addressing you specifically.
I often think there would be far less toxicity in this community if folks took a moment to step back and think a lil.
No apology needed and see you in the fog too. My fav time of year is approaching Halloween and I always get a bit of a DBD kick on during it. I hope your killer games are fun and your survivor games suitably scary. 👻
-
I use light born a lot, mostly because I'm kinda lazy about avoiding flashlights. Don't have to think about it great.
Also you'd be amazed at how many players keep trying to blind you if you just pretend a lil to try and avoid the blind.
I get a lot of stalk progression and downs that way.
I see object of obsession maybe one in 10-20 games so it rarely plays a part.
The last minute switch to flashlights and the locker save exploit teams are rather common, lightborn just dumps all over that without me having to think.
-
lets avoid the higher concepts of changing perspective all together and look at what you can practically do in game. If you are serious about changing your perspective.
First - No quitting.
When you hit the queue button you are committing to play out the game regardless of what happens. You'll never build resilience to what frustrates you if you constantly avoid it. The moment you quit mid game your session is done you don't play again till the next day at the earliest. If you lost but stuck it out in game then reward yourself.
Second - Try playing with no addons or offerings
Remove any false sense of additional investment in the game. You're here to play it out and have a laugh, not earn back what you spent on items/addons. Reducing the sense of investment reduces the sense of competitiveness. You don't have to do this every game but if you are starting to feel agitated then take one possible element of agitation and eliminate it from the pool, you'll care less about outcome and focus more on fun.
Third - Still do anything to win and expect the same from your opponent.
Its entirely possible to be a casual gamer and still be motivated to win, the difference lies in whether you enjoy playing the game or just winning the game. The aim is to foster the former and forgo the latter. Even on the losing foot, play it out, play it out and see you may surprise yourself. Don't beat yourself up if you get caught up in your need to win, remember the game itself is fun win or loss, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't try to win.
Fourth - Take regular breaks
Do something else, anything else. Not just when you feel frustrated either, end it on a high note sometimes and try and resist that urge to play again for a bit.
Last - Don't take it out on other players
The moment you start doing something out of spite (i.e face camping an obnoxious survivor, Hanging around the exit gate to BM an obnoxious killer). Stop. No mater how justified it might feel. Stop. By all means camp if it makes sense, tunnel if it makes sense but, don't do it out of spite.
The moment you think "I'm going to get this jerk survivor and punish them" stop and let them go. The moment you think "That killer was scummy I'm gonna BM at the exit gate" just leave and move on. When your motivation becomes negative your overall experience becomes negative, don't do that to yourself.
Give some of these a try next time you sit down to play a game.
-
@Farya said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3549903#Comment_3549903
Why so selfish? Doesn't hurt you, if everyone else get's extra BP as well. Sometimes I don't understand peoples lack of empathy or generosity against others.
Is it any less selfish to expect others to attenuate how they play because you brought an offering?
Its not unempathetic to play game how you like regardless of what offerings people bring, in fact that has nothing to do with empathy or lack thereof.
I think people often misuse the concept of empathy to justify being upset over a game.
Lets look at the theme here, you are playing a game that simulates the brutal torture and murder of 4 people, complaining that players don't do it as compassionately as possible is just incongruous with the entire concept.
It doesn't hurt you to not get maximum BP's for your offering either. "But I wasted the BP's" so you wasted an infinitely available resource which is given for free for simply playing the game, the sunk cost is so minor its barely measurable.
Its not an act of generosity to bring an offering, its just a game addon. It in no way obligates someone to change how they might play.
If they choose to and everyone gets heaps of points great, but if they play as they always would then that's neither selfish or unempathetic, its just gameplay and doesn't make them a bad person whom lacks empathy and generosity.
A little rational perspective goes a long way.
-
@So_Saucee said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3548899#Comment_3548899
Sounds like camper is mad, stop camping and play the game correctly and you won't have anything to worry about
"play the game correctly" = Play it how I want you to play it.
This kind of mindset is part of the problem.
"There is only one way to play the game and anyone choosing not to follow that one way is not playing it right."
While a mechanic like this will hopefully lessen the likelihood that a killer will stand there staring you in the face on hook at 5 gens, what about those times when it makes sense to switch from chasing to defensive play?
Example.
Last night I had 2 gens left and only 1 hook, just a really mismatched unfortunate combination of map, killer and SWF. (Scratched mirror Myers on shattered square). Now that's fine some games go that way but...
1 hook at 2 gens left means I can't really pressure the survivors to create adequate stall by committing to chases, so I switch it up to defend the hook I do have.
Survivors keep rushing the hook to get the save and I turn it into 2 downs with some good play around the hook. This results in a 3k by endgame, last person hatched out.
The ability to unhook yourself due to killer proximity until end game collapse really limits the capacity for killers to reset the pressure mid game or to change up how they play when the scenario calls for it.
This is one of the reasons I'm skeptical about the current change. It doesn't offer a balanced solution to all but the most egregious 5 gen face camper and the appeasement of the "waah camping!" crowd who bemoan it in any form even when its the best play to make.
Case in point the poster quoted, whom appears to think that any form of camping is not playing the game "correctly" and that criticism of the mechanic must just be the result of a face camper being mad.
-
Sure you're not a fan of camping that's fine, but It happens just move onto the next game.
Also bringing an offering doesn't obligate people to play a certain way.
To get the maximum bonus out of offerings, the onus is on you the player to not get caught so you can stay in the game and earn points longer, its not really your opponent's job to do that for you.
-
3x Scratched mirror Myers on Shattered Square yesterday, eh what are you gonna do. My kingdom for a map with LOS blockers.
One team all running MFT, get a hit and I'll see that survivor next week, thanks for stopping by.
Thank goodness for Rancor at least it got me 1 mori kill.
-
I don't know, I like going to the feed to check things out post game.
Interesting to hear people react to gameplay, especially gameplay you are involved in.
Most a pretty reasonable people, a few have been sheepishly apologetic after being very salty in their commentary and some just continue the rage fest. Its all rather interesting and often worth popping by the stream to say hey and GG post game.
The only time I will consider lobby dodging as killer is when I port in and there is a readied up team already there. That makes me suspect its a back fill from someone else's previous lobby dodge and I'm probably horridly mismatched with the other players.
I could be wrong on this but rarely are those games evenly matched. I either have everyone on the ground in the first 2 mins or I get 1 hook the whole match, neither makes for a particularly interesting game.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3545470#Comment_3545470
From a legal or moral standpoint the Internet is not different than the real world, there is not much of a difference if you insult someone here or there, there is still people on both sides, annoy them and there is going to be a similar response, you will get called out for or called names, that's just what it is, and if you induced this anger then it is kind of fair, isn't it?
"From a legal or moral standpoint the Internet is not different than the real world," sure but using a strong mechanic in a game that is within the confines of the ruleset is neither illegal or immoral, so this argument is nonsense.
"you will get called out for or called names, that's just what it is" Sure but two wrongs don't make a right, stop trying to say they do that's part of the problem, don't be part of the problem.
"if you induced this anger then it is kind of fair, isn't it?" Your inability to control your anger at others over a game is not the fault of others. Take some responsibility for your emotional state and grow up a little.
It's a game meaning in the grand scheme of things its completely unimportant.
If you can't separate the game world from the real world and control your anger about it then you shouldn't play with others till you can, because guess what... some people are gonna play in a way you don't like and that's ok, no matter how much you don't like it.
-
Well no, its not needed, because the anti tunnel system is avoiding being hit in chase and escaping.
That's on the survivor and the perks they choose to bring, that is the anti tunnel system.
-
Survivors are just re-skins of the same thing, so pick the one you think looks ok and roll with it.
-
Eh after several years of playing DBD on and off I can't say I really care that much.
Usually I'm just choosing the cheapest stuff if there isn't something I specifically want.
I'll almost always nab a mori or good addon.
But I don't think I'll every use the roughly 100 scratched mirrors I have but I do love Jumpscare Myers so I'll definitely keep collecting them.
-
I depends what you really classify as toxic.
DBD is a game where you can face pretty imminent non-participation and elimination. Those kind of hard consequences can be triggering but they are what make DBD so great.
There are actual stakes in this game, in most PVP games I know I'll respawn and therefore I'm not really bothered by self preservation. There are virtually no consequences outside of overall game result and score at the end.
This means I can pretend to be a super hero because frankly outside of endgame score there are no consequences for any of my actions. Therefore no real emotional investment besides the disappointment of not getting the result I wanted post game.
In DBD there are no heroes, just villains and victims. The gameplay can be visceral and consequential. That is the biggest drawcard.
It's also in my view one of the reasons people get so emotional about the game, because the hard consequences can stir some pretty primal levels of frustration.
It would be great if people were adult enough not to take petty in game events out on each other but that's the nature of people we can be petty and vindictive when we don't get what we want.
There is very little in game that is actually "toxic", what tends to be toxic is the overreaction to in game events.
- A mechanic/playstyle was frustrating and denied a person the game they wanted
- They assume the motivation of the opponent must be to maliciously deny them the game they wanted
- They turn the in game event into a personal attack and then go on to feel justified in attacking other players over it
The recipe for toxicity. You see it played out time and again on these forums and by streamers on a regular basis.
It's possible to play a game of DBD against the most one sided tedious broken mechanic and still walk away not hating your opponent for it.
Unfortunately it's a lot easier to just give into emotion, feel like a real life victim rather than just a pretend game victim and project all that angry emotion onto everyone around you.
Just look at the forums its 1/3 constructive feedback/discussion, 1/3 Sharing game experience and general enjoyment, 1/3 entitled self victimization rationalizing why they hate everyone and everything. Like all things guess which 3rd screams the loudest.
-
@Farya said:
I already faced LORD SLUG just a few minutes ago in Solo Queue.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/QCHIRLWMCBKW/1whatwedeserve.jpg
It made me laugh hard. I thought we got what we deserved because we intentionally started chase with nurse instead of doing gens. (From my side, I wanted to do a "blind the killer 6 times" tome,). So i was kinda laughing about myself. And I love how we crouched all together and made this cuddly mountain. ❤️ These girls gave a meaning to the last minutes of my life as a Jeff.
That's the way to take it too.
It can be "ugh bled out" but the reality is its a minor inconvenience at worst. Just snuggle up and laugh it off.
Or crawl for dear life to where you think hatch might spawn and hope for the best.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3547471#Comment_3547471
There is enough base slowdown and very little need for compensation, is the thing. You have never needed to facecamp or hard tunnel someone out immediately, in their extremes those have always been ways to circumvent skill expression and them being reigned in to not be as powerful and free doesn't require compensation.
Assuming that survivors have no/minimal tools to speed up generators, just playing the macro game and occupying as many survivors as you can at once is enough to slow down the game if you're skilled enough-- and if you aren't skilled enough for that, there's plenty of tools you can bring in to give you a little more leeway. There is still a problem with how powerful toolboxes are and with survivors sometimes spawning all spread out on separate generators that should be addressed because that is the thing that actually harms a killer's ability to generate pressure at base, but that's not the same thing as needing to compensate for cheap tactics being weakened.
OK, to be clear I'm not saying there needs to be compensation for this specific event. This is a more higher concept broad scale view.
If the goal is to drive the game toward a chase everyone equally and play for 12 hooks general playstyle, then that scenario invariably favours survivors over killers, given that survivors are at their strongest while all 4 are alive.
It's more than possible to win going for 12 consecutive hooks but its really not optimal and being forced to do it every game is rather limited and laborious by design.
So while creating camping deterrents and mechanics to make these things less skewed is perfectly fine, we need to make sure to avoid scenarios where the only option is to chase every survivor sequentially and equally.
Because not only is that a dull and limited design, it hinges on the flawed concept that investing time in chasing survivors is equal across all survivors, which is blatantly untrue.
Changes to limit "face-camping" sure great, changes that limit play options to just one defined style of play... not great. I think that's the concept the OP is getting at albeit rather ham-fistedly.
-
I wouldn't say loss of agency for killers.
But mechanics like this do lend themselves to driving toward one stylized type of play. Favoring prolonged game time for all players over early eliminations/non-participation.
Unfortunately nothing changes the fact that less survivors means greater killer advantage more survivors means greater survivor advantage, so the more the game pushes toward survivors staying viably in game longer as a base mechanic, the more the need to compensate game slowdown in other ways to make up for the skewed advantage this brings to the survivor side.
Now you could make the point that its the killer's job to stall the game but then you could also make the point that its the survivors job to safely survive and rescue.
Yet we still have built in BT to maximize chance of escape at a base level, so what compensation for loss of mechanics that circumvent the stylized play of 12 hooks, none sequential, can killers expect.
That's the great question of balance. I don't think its trying to limit options for killer players but if the goal is to drive towards a standard of play that allows for longer survivor game time, then killers need to be buffed accordingly to make sure there is enough base slowdown.
-
Trapper plus anybody, you keep trapping your buddy without clear communication.
"Dammit Chuckles... here?... you had to put a trap here?"
-
I doubt many players will just slug and stand over your body rather than facecamp.
Mostly due to it takes a whole 2 minutes longer to bleed out, making an even great losing time sink for the killer, and you can be picked up really quickly once your bar is maxed.
-
No player should feel the need to play "nice" or "fair" as defined by much of this community, which often means "play to my advantage not yours."
But ask yourself
- Are you playing how you play because you find it fun?
- Or is it because you spitefully want revenge on other players over gameplay that you don't like?
The first is fine, the second is a really bad motivation to play and is a recipe to ruin your own fun.
You'll also find a vast number of people on these forums heavily advocate for the second mindset and then wonder why they don't have fun.
They do this while decrying "toxicity" in all forms, which speaks to a warped sense of reality and entitlement.
The truth is the fix starts with you, the player, to not allow yourself to be aggravated by trivial game events.
The great irony is the collection of frequent posters replying here who are touting the "play how you feel" mindset, having just finished berating others over how they play in other threads.
-
I can't say it describes everyone, but in general society there is a prevalence of entitled narcissism and a desire for immediate gratification in most modern walks of life, why should gaming be any different and perhaps even more pronounced with the shield of anonymity the internet provides.
"I want the game that I want or I'm not going to play." is the mantra.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3544908#Comment_3544908
It is not really that biased, think about different topics that were on the forum before, Nurse changes, Deaths linger changes, they were rather one sided, but they still had arguments on both sides, it is quite the generalization to assume only people who hate a certain thing are on the forum when you obviously also have people defending it.
So you are telling me it is fine to get hold hostage for an hour or basically die on purpose just to get out but it is not to tell them that is a really unfun experience to go against? By playing in that way you are causing this, why should someone be spared of getting called out for it? I'm not advocating slurs or something but I don't think there is any problem with calling out unwanted behavior.
Bleed all four people out on the floor for 4 minutes or hold a game hostage for an hour is apparently fine, but don't you dare calling that out because that's toxic, that's just ridiculous.
I've answered these points so you can either reread everything I've already written or just agree to disagree on what constitutes bad behaviour.
I personally think bad behaviour in real life tops bad behaviour in game. Neither are good but one is worse than the other.
Ask yourself what kind of person am I that I equate, or even confuse, one with the other?
-
@Gandor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3544901#Comment_3544901
I can agree with that provided you talk about judiths. But not piece. There's no counter to that without luck/prior knowledge (distortion on obsession and basically try to win without killer ever finding obsession, or obsession never running when found = it's possibly better to give hook state + full stalk then giving tokens). Stalking is way too easy when you are 130% and there is no LoS blocking if killer can catch up to you in 3s.
Yeah you have a point
-
@Majin151 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3544908#Comment_3544908
My guy if you think the hate towards skull merchant is just a forum thing you obviously haven't played the game in a bit
Legit you had a 50/50 chance of everyone leaving as soon as someone discovers the killer is a skull merchant and a 99.9 chance if they saw them placing drones to secure a 3 gen
Sure plenty of folks have complained, but does that justify what the poster I'm replying to is advocating which is attacking people and calling them names outside of game over using a poorly designed mechanic.
The mechanics of SM are no longer even the point of the discussion.
Think carefully about what you are throwing you hat in the ring in support of here, its basically a self righteous pro-toxicity argument which is nothing more than a tantrum over a game.
-
Given PIPs are no longer linked to match making it would go a long way to remove the de-pip.
I don't really care about pips, but some players really fixate on it (That's fine if reaching max is your goal) but one of the most efficient ways to do that is to avoid de-pipping and that often means dodging lobbies, which in turn screws up match making.
People will probably still dodge but you'd maybe get a few less.
-
Blindness does what its meant to do, just because its hard countered by comms, like half the stuff in this game, doesn't mean its bad for solo queue.
-
Because you are assuming intent.
Most of the player problems in this game and what leads to the majority of out of game toxicity is people going around assuming another player's intent.
People always tend to assume the worst and want to punish other players on that basis alone.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3543272#Comment_3543272
If you go over the forum how many people did you see that wrote posts that they liked to get 3 genned by skull merchant? On the other hand how many people complained about it? It was already agreed upon before that it is a terrible mechanic that needed to change, so why exactly would people like to against it and where are all the voices that like? Who wants a dragged out game for 30+ minutes? My point was that nobody voiced that they liked it, if you find one please tell me, before I m seriously curious how they could enjoy that...
It does not really provide any bonuses for the gameplay I would say, you could argue BP but long games don't really award many I'm comparison to the time spend so I don't see that either.
How exactly is it abuse to call people out for what they did when they did it? If you play a match and take into account that you know that you will make the other side miserable and you still do it, why should they not call you out on it? You can play how you like it and they can tell you what they think of you for playing a certain way, if one is fair play so is the other. Sure they don't owe me, but I still don't see why I am not allowed to that tell them that is was horribly annoying to get against, I don't have a right to tell them how to play, sure, but they don't have a right not to hear how miserable the whole thing was, which they already know that it is anyway, since the forum has been full of it and so on and so forth.
The forum is where people come to complain it's a biased sample.
BHVR will change it eventually till then, play it out and stop whining and attacking other players out of spite.
Calling people can out can also be called having a temper tantrum over a game, stop trying to rationalize being nasty to others over a game.
-
@Gandor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3543200#Comment_3543200
Not talking about Judith's - but you addressed both addons. It's clear you don't have that much experience. If I was ever to pick a game where I should win against much better team then I am, I will 100% NOT pick spirit/nurse/blight (even though I am decent spirit and nurse), but tombstone piece meyers with quick stalk and PWYF (no matter how good you are, you can't chase against 130% meyers), lethal (you need to charge PWYF ASAP - so that you can stalk easily), corrupt (more time for no investment) and deadlock (more time for no investment).
With this build (and a little bit of skill to not loose any stacks) most games will be totally free and the rest of them will be very doable. And I don't care how cracked your enemy team is (sure, if you get literally Oracle that knew beforehand, you probably will not win. But for everyone else, easy 3K). The downside is, that nobody really gets to play the game, nobody will get any points and probably everyone will depip.
I know how to play Myer's, more than enough years splaying him under my belt, what I'm saying is its not as bad as people make out.
Players don't know how to break line of sight effectively and then get caught off guard by the mori that's about it.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3542986#Comment_3542986
" Should players at least try not to make other players upset in game? "
It is fairly obvious that not a single person out there likes to play against a 3genning skull merchant, there is not much subjective difference about that... Yeah sure we don't know" how he holds his 3gen" but what is it most likely? He is kicking gens, following survivors for short distances, maybe make them drop pallets nearby and then straight back to the generators... I don't think many, if any people enjoy going against something like that.
"Do player's playing in a way I don't like make them jerks?"
Yeah, once again rather subjective what people like or don't like, but then again if it something that basically nobody likes, like caitlyn 3 Gen ner over here, then yeah you might be a jerk, same if you slug 4 people and bleed them out for no reason. You obviously know that those people will dislike the playstyle and dislike you for playing it and you cannot even say you didn't know because basically everyone agrees that's it is annoying and miserable to against. Also nobody's personality is just being a jerk but playing skull merchant and 3 genning is a jerk move and makes you a jerk in that certain situation...
I mean you can play the way you want but if you play like a jerk you cannot really complain about being called out for it... You knew nobody likes the playstyle and they will have a miserable time, it is what it is...
Also it is not about dieing or living it is about the amount of time wasted and the only way to not waste 20-60 minutes in a boring 3 Gen game is by dying early, whichsny people won't do out of spite but yeah the most reasonable thing is to just go afk or DC so they can have their chill win or the game against bots, anything else is most of the time just a useless struggle against an inevitable outcome...
So once again why not play against bots? You don't ruin people's days, you don't need to justify yourself, you don't get called out for this and your game does not change, since you have the same gameplay of kicking gens...
"not a single person out there likes to play against" , "basically everyone agrees that's it is annoying and miserable to against." Amazing how your view reflects the views of everybody. Absolutism usually makes for weak arguments because it's based solely on feeling and opinionated perspective.
So once again why not play against bots? I've answered this already, bot games don't provide any of the bonuses that online games do. A legit strategy against bots is just as legit against humans, even a potentially annoying strat can be legit if within the confines of the game rules.
Rationalize the abuse of other players over game mechanics all you want. No matter how moral you feel in your need to police in game behaviour. It doesn't change the fact that neither the OP, or anyone else, owe you, or this community, an explanation for how they choose to legitimately play the game.
-
I'd disagree about tombstone and tombstone piece.
You have to ramp up to use them which takes time and results in largely not progressing the killer objective for the duration.
For tombstone piece if you don't use it wisely you can wind up with no power left for the rest of the match.
Playing them is fun and facing them is scary two things DBD should be.
-
Its still largely in the killer's favor, you move faster you don't have to hide from anything while searching.
The choice to hunt for hatch and risk a gate escape is rather balanced, I have this auto get out but I have to find it while moving slower and more vulnerable. Can I risk waiting out by a gate and getting out that way if I can.
In its current form the gameplay is pretty good if you think about it.
-
I don't know if it would induce players to slug for the 4k more often, but it definitely makes finding the 4th survivor a lil easier.
You are probably seeing correlation not causation, if I'm likely to slug for the 4k anyway and have a tool that makes it easier, I'll probably use that tool.
Is it so bad though? As from my understanding of these forums... half the problem people have with being slugged for the 4k is having to lie there and wait for 4 mins, if this speeds up that process shouldn't that be a good thing for them.
I know logic is a heavy burden sometimes.
-
@MeanieDeeny said:
I think some of you have some really amazing feedback and valid points. And you know, it could be "burn out" for sure. Maybe I just need a break from DBD. And for the record, i'm not hoping DBD dies...and I don't want to forget about it and move on from it altogether..I want it to be in a fun, healthy, playable state.
I do find tomes and such give the game more purpose...free cosmetics to do challenges? Sure, if I have a bad match and at least did my challenge I feel accomplished.
But I don't see why so many people think the game cannot die because it has licensed chapters..who cares who/ what's in the game, if the game is in a miserable state that makes most people not want to play.
I think all the people who have suggested "health updates" rather than new chapters etc. are definitely on to something and it would be cool if BHVR considered this..I think a lot of people would be happy with that.
Its not so much that the game cannot die due to licenses.
Its just when comparing it to a game that has a single license, and thus a much more limited scope, like TCM, the ability for DBD to acquire a range of popular horror licenses and implement them relatively smoothly into their product is a big drawcard over a more limited design.
While licenses alone won't make or break DBD, having them available definitely plays a part in the game's popularity and continued success.
-
@Rudjohns said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3542895#Comment_3542895
I think its quite the opposite lol
Never had a problem with killer on this map, but I don't play Hillbilly, cannibal or Blight, so I don't know how they feel on that map
Absolutely one of the best maps for Huntress, Deathslinger, Trickster, and now the Xenomorph
I honestly don't think the map needs rework, but yeah, everything needs to be killer sided now (thats why they never touch Midwich, Rotten Fields, Wrecker's Yard, Shelter Woods, etc)
Yeah I don't find it bad when just chasing but I do feel like I get a lot more wha?? tantrums when playing Leatherface.
Guess I gently clipped one of those hard as steel chainsaw stopping pieces of burnt wood.
-
Hmm so playing basement lockdown trapper will require a lil more thought then.
Should be interesting to see how this works.
-
Kill switch exists to remove game breaking bugs in the short term for a fix.
Its not there to remove stuff people don't like.
-
Oh please the melodrama.
Xeno plays pretty much the same. At least I didn't notice much of a difference really.
-
I always find it interesting when people think a game in the same competitive space will result in the immediate death of current content.
DBD is a juggernaut when it comes to PVP survival horror not many games stack up. TCM looks like a really good alternative but what is the long term viability of it?
If they are based around a single license TCM, much like FF13, how much customization around that is there?
Its new and its great so it'll probably vacuum up a lot of current and former DBD players but I doubt it will stop people from playing DBD. I think DBD has had the lifespan it does because it's rather generic template lends itself to a lot of different killers, licenses and maps.
I don't think you are going to see a Xenomorph pop up in TCM, maybe one day when it gets stale they'll need it branch out but it'll be a disjointed affair.
I'm sure DBD will truck along just fine regardless of the existence of TCM.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3542261#Comment_3542261
The fact that loss of agency is built into the game means that taking advantage of loss of agency is part of the game. So if a player doesn't find loss of agency fun then DBD may not be the game for them because loss of agency is the very goal of one side.You're conflating two different points in a piece to make a strawman. I said that people in a game still have agency even if the designer creates a broken concept. I didn't say loss of agency as a game mechanic is inherently bad, that's an argument you've made up.
This is where your child example falls apart because it requires the child to have complete understanding of the social construct of the scenario and children often lacking that will make the decision that best benefits them in the moment.That's what makes this worse. The vast majority of players are, I presume, at least tweens. Young children can be forgiven for not understanding the feelings of others, but its not something we should accept from everyone else.
This why I don't do hypotheticals with real world contexts for in game events, the rationale for the answer doesn't stack up outside of the most rudimentary desire to make a pointOkay, we'll avoid hypotheticals.
It is well known that the 3 gen defense strat is easy for the skull merchant and creates a boring unfun game for the survivors. In this case the OP even discusses that, but says he enjoys it as a killer.
How is it morally okay to engage in activity that you know others will despise?
This is completely different from other elements in DbD. As a game with winners and losers players should understand sometime they'll be on the losing side. All players also have their own personal dislikes which may pop up in a game, but again that is a normal aspect of a game that people have different preferences. The issue here is choosing a killer and playstyle that you know the other side will actively dislike.
"If I was playing a board game with people and I intentionally slowed it down, I'd be a jerk", Really even if the goal of one side was to stall the game, is every killer who runs a gen slow down build a jerk? Healing slowdown build are jerks?The whole process of the killer game is stalling for time, guess that means anyone who plays killer is just a jerk by your given example. Again CONTEXT.You're arguing to absurdity - you are saying that because any killer can slow the game down for seconds to minutes, a killer that can completely hold the game for an hour is the same thing.
You say CONTEXT, but you continually misrepresent it.
It is not inherently malicious, but if you immediately classify anyone who tries it as a jerk out to ruin your fun, because in a different real world context it would be seen as jerk behaviour, then basically everyone is a jerk and your conclusion is as flawed as your assumptions.Multiplayer video games are played by real human beings. I make no assumptions about the underlying causes that lead a person to their actions, but I do feel fine judging the actions itself.
And the conclusion is this and really not even engaged by you: if a person, whether killer or survivor, engages in a behavior that they believe others will actively ruin other's enjoyment, that is jerkish behavior.
Ugh I had a response to this but I realized its going in circles and when people start misusing the term strawman as some kind of argument winning buzzword it gets old quick, so rather than reply directly I'll sum up with the same argument I've always held to with anything like this because it doesn't matter what the gameplay is the argument is always the same. To the topic at hand 3-Gen SM...
- Does 3-gen SM need fixing? yes it's pretty obvious that its mechanically broken and drags the game out for longer than intended.
- Will playing 3-gen SM upset some players because they don't like it? Yes its obvious some people will get upset over it.
- The fact that some people get upset over it means that nobody should ever play it? No, because guess what your grumpy opinion doesn't get to dictate how others have fun in a game. If we let that kind of thinking take precedence then people wouldn't be able to do anything in game.
- Should players at least try not to make other players upset in game? Sure but given the subjective nature of offence anything in game may upset your opponent, all you can do is focus on your own fun and play within the confines of the rules and not engage in post or out of game toxicity. Name calling, taunting, abuse etc.
- Do player's playing in a way I don't like make them jerks? Inherently no, judging the character of a person over a single instance of online gaming mechanics is a very petty, assumptive and childish way to behave.
- Can I accept that online gaming involves interaction with many strangers with varying experience, motivation and concepts of what's fun? You have to accept that, you are randomly playing with strangers from all walks of life. You can't expect to apply the same standards of game etiquette to that setting that you would find in a more intimate friends setting or even a face to face gaming group with strangers.
- Do I need to realize its only a game and if I die/lose its not the end of the world? You should start that way and stop when you can't maintain that mindset anymore.
With this set of ideas established I go back to the comment that started all this discussion, that the "OP doesn't need to justify why they play or enjoy 3-Gen SM to this community," they are allowed to enjoy it while it's a thing.
Last bit of food for thought, if you are going around calling people who play in a way you don't like jerks or other names, it just may be you whom is the real jerk.
-
@UndeddJester said:
It's pretty immersive tbf. On comms with players you tend to goof off, but solo... it feels much more like:
https://media.tenor.com/0wEDO7NrEq8AAAAC/oh-no.gif
I still have my heart pounding whenever I'm the last survivor holding onto the switch to open the gate...
Exactly this, as a group we can smash out gens and chat on comms but as a solo survivor the game takes on a more threatening edge that I actually find more fun game wise.
My buddy is no longer telling me exactly what they are up to and who/where the killer is, DBD as its meant to be.
I like solo Q for that reason.
-
@StrangeGuy said:
I have no problem with the Chess Merchant for two reasons:
1. I see her very rarely.
2. If she plays in a 3 gen defence way and refuses to chase survivors, I demonstratively repair one of these 3 gens until I die. Even 4 minutes on the ground is faster than trying to repair gens for 60 minutes.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3541269#Comment_3541269
OP literally wrote: "Of course its unfun to face, but just being able to relax and have fun (while admittedly playing in an unfun way) is actually quite nice."
Also they ignored questions about why they don't play against bots 🙈
So people assume the worst.
IMO, OP doesn't want to make excuses for their play style. Probably, this appears to be a bait, similar to the thread about the best build for tunneling.
Maybe, but nothing about the OP's post strikes me as a malicious attempt to ruin people's game. If it is bait then kudos to the OP because I think it generated some pretty interesting discussion.
I tried to answer the why wouldn't they just play bots and I got a bunch of folks jumping on me trying to justify their skewed assumptions with "everyone who doesn't is a jerk being their whole argument". I don't blame the OP for avoiding it given how reactionary this crowd is.
There are lots of things that people find unfun in DBD, the OP acknowledges this can be one. While it would be nice for everyone to consider each others sense of fun and try to make the game fun for all, typically that ends up undermining the game in other ways.
Often I find trying to be considerate and fun in game ends up being 'farmy' and takes all the excitement out of the game. Not bad from time to time but the best games of DBD are hard fought and vicious. I find that fun.
Someone else may find that that idea unfun. They are allowed to have that opinion of the game and doing so makes neither of us a jerk or bad person etc etc.
People do tend to assume the worst. I think they want people whom play in a manner they don't like to be seen as malicious jerks. This aids them in demanding the game play they want.
I'm sure a lot of it is inherently selfishly motivated and dressed up as an altruism. "I don't like this, change it, because anyone who does what I don't like is a jerk, and jerks are bad, so I'm good". I get the game I want and I get self validation its win-win for me.
1 and 2 yep its what I've always said, pretty rare and I try to play it out live or die. That's all you can do in game till BHVR make changes, no hard feelings.
I think its busted and needs changing but I don't immediately think anyone who chooses to play it is inherently some jerk out to ruin my fun.
-
Michael Myers
His power captures the feel of the movies really well. Creepy stalker who builds to big slasher ending.
His addons can completely change up his play style.
Stealth, jumpscare, threatening tier 3 he's got a lot going for him.
Great killer to play and face in all forms.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3542027#Comment_3542027
But its a legit game strategy and people are going to play it if they can. So until it gets patched out we should expect to face it and try and find ways to beat it.People have been using playgrounds, so I'll go with kids as an example.
If a group of children have P.E. class and the gym teacher lays out the game and everyone is excited to play it, but he then adds on a rule, "If Jimmy says 'I win', the game immediately ends, he gets ice cream, and everyone else has to do homework."
If Jimmy says 'I win', he's a jerk.
If he manages to not say that, he's an honorable lad.
Sure, the main mistake here is on the teacher who even put such an absurd situation into the game, but that doesn't mean those playing the game have lost agency.
Now does that make the people who play it terrible people in reality? No it doesn't.Taking this moralistic stance and then using it to justify attacking each other online over something as trivial as a game.If I was playing a board game with people and I intentionally slowed it down, I'd be a jerk.
If I checked out my groceries' really slow even though there's a line, I'd be a jerk.
If in any 'real world' situation I behaved in a manner that I could reasonably expect would make others miserable and unhappy, I'd be a jerk.
What makes a video game different? You might not be able to see them, but those are very really people also playing.
Hypotheticals can be fun but when using them as examples of motivation in choice tests for social isolation, context matters. Trust me I do that for a living.
In DBD loss of agency is part of the game, it should expected.
The fact that loss of agency is built into the game means that taking advantage of loss of agency is part of the game. So if a player doesn't find loss of agency fun then DBD may not be the game for them because loss of agency is the very goal of one side.
Slug, hook, dead all represent loss of agency.
Killers don't tend to lose agency so again if loss of agency is the problem then killer is the role that should be played.
Capitalizing on the mechanic of loss of agency as the game expects is not inherently being a jerk.
This is where your child example falls apart because it requires the child to have complete understanding of the social construct of the scenario and children often lacking that will make the decision that best benefits them in the moment.
So Jimmy will take the ice cream and win but that doesn't make him a jerk, because he was offered a loaded choice to begin with. This why I don't do hypotheticals with real world contexts for in game events, the rationale for the answer doesn't stack up outside of the most rudimentary desire to make a point. Making it a weak way to illustrate the point.
Can player's leverage the lack of agency that DBD provides to achieve victory? In the context of DBD yes they can.
Should they? sure if they want to, because the mechanics of the game and achievements are built around that concept.
"If I was playing a board game with people and I intentionally slowed it down, I'd be a jerk", Really even if the goal of one side was to stall the game, is every killer who runs a gen slow down build a jerk? Healing slowdown build are jerks?
The whole process of the killer game is stalling for time, guess that means anyone who plays killer is just a jerk by your given example. Again CONTEXT.
So back to the topic there is a strong way to stall the game right now, and it's too strong. Using it is a very good idea if you want to stall things and have as much time as possible to achieve your goals.
It is not inherently malicious, but if you immediately classify anyone who tries it as a jerk out to ruin your fun, because in a different real world context it would be seen as jerk behaviour, then basically everyone is a jerk and your conclusion is as flawed as your assumptions.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3542032#Comment_3542032
It is more over specific playstyle not game mechanics... It is not that the bleeding out exists and that you don't get slugged for eternity but you can still get annoyed by players bleeding you out for four minutes and call them out for it, same with 3 genning skull merchant, there is nothing wrong with it. People telling you how they felt after playing against you should at least be one part of why post game chat even exists.
You can also try to break a brick wall with your head, has the same chances as breaking a 3gen against sm as soloq...
Sure there is a lot about this game that can confound and annoy, there is plenty about it I find annoying and you can say hey I found that really annoying in post game and ask someone why.
But if their answer is its strong and I had fun, then you gotta roll with it. What some people find fun really pisses me off but I don't get to dictate what's fun.
When facing something I find unfun I can either do my best to play it out and move on or spend my time being angry and attack other players about it. Which do you think is the most productive way to play?
This opinion of gameplay stands because simply It's only a game, even if you die in game to a really unfair mechanic you are still gonna be alive and well at the end. There is virtually no concrete consequences as a result of how someone plays.
So if someone wants to make believe they are a big scary monster and play it as such I'll play along because that's what make believe is.
So critique a broken mechanic by all means, that's how change happens, but if you think there is some kind of moralistic mission to calling out someone who uses it, then sure do that if you like, but get ready for your efforts to not matter because the reality is they don't.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3541540#Comment_3541540
I really wouldn't engage with them, they just like to defend horrid behavior. Pretty sure this was the same person defending a whole bunxh of toxic playstyles because, "they're obviously just role-playing a psychopath, get used to it."
@FrenchBagels said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3541269#Comment_3541269
It’s your motivation to be complacent with the indefensible that’s mind boggling.
Your argument here is outright similar to defending Prayer Bead Spirit and Old Legion. Call out the bad game design and the people abusing it.
Typical to just go for the "they are a toxic person ignore them" rather than engage with the topic.
The topic is does your assumptions about other players motivation affect your ability to interact with them in a civil manner?
Nothing in this game is so bad, even completely broken mechanics, that players can justify being so critical, to the point of abusive in some cases, of each other outside of game. Leading to players feeling the need to post justifications for way they may play.
Ask yourselves how often does my preconceived notion of "good play" influence my opinions and assumptions about other players and lead to me having a negative attitude toward them as a person outside game?
That's the foundation of player toxicity, before we even get to mechanics.
-
@CookieBaws said:
Up haste to 5%, but make it have 30 seconds of duration, which consumes only in chase. And replenishes for healing and unhooking. And make to cause exhaustion for 5 seconds if running in chase.
The idea of it working as some kind of recharging power is an interesting one.
-
@antag0nisticw0mble said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3541515#Comment_3541515
and it only quoted half of what I said smh
Yeah but you said the same thing twice with different speed examples. So the topic is covered regardless, here it is in full in case you forgot.
"Killers can stack pwyf, and noed so hows that different?
Also pwyf stacks with bloodlust and gives you 15% at max stacks. Add that to bloodlust and a 115 killer becomes a 145."
Basically "killers can stack speed also did you know killers can stack speed".
Which was in reply to my comment that neither killer or survivor should stack speed. So we covered this already.
-
@NerfDHalready said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3541508#Comment_3541508
mft by itself also is a problem not just the stacking. shorter speed burst sounds interesting, getting caught in the open especially against stbfl would be death. although the perk's problem mostly is the infinite availability for such a strong effect so a possible nerf imo should address that.
Yeah the idea was more a throw out suggestion not really a thought out change.
Just throwing around concepts that could change up how it works.
I can't say I've felt greatly hindered as killer by MFT alone, except when playing Scratched mirror Myers on an open map. But you are hindered by so much else in that scenario that MFT just feels like one more issue on top of collective issues.
Maybe if you get MFT endurance hit you become exhausted thus limiting the double hit and speed burst nature of it post healing.
It is very powerful and that kind of effect usually requires a build up like PWYF or some vulnerability like totem NOED. Its basically survivor NOED to some extent so maybe it should be a boon. You get the speed and endurance while in the totem radius? Although people would just drop it at strong loops and go there every chase it would get bland fast.
Maybe it could ramp down in that the first hit gives 3% the second 2% the last 1% so it's strong early but there is diminishing returns as the game progresses rather than a one and done use.