pseudechis
pseudechis
About
- Username
- pseudechis
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3541269#Comment_3541269
Dude the 3 genning sm only kicks gens for an hour, does not chase and that's it, there is nothing fun and entertaining about it? You re just waiting for players to get sick of it and either give up or DC...
Is that genuinely the case because I've been eventually downed and bled out or hooked by every one of them that I've faced. Which only equates to about 4 times online.
So I see it very rarely and when trying to break the 3 gen I died each time and moved on.
Now if you are stuck in game with someone whom doesn't even swing at you and just walks around in circles kicking gens report that person they are stalling the game.
Doesn't sound to me like that is the motivation of the OP though.
So are we going to just assume all players who try 3-gen SM are out to stall the game and maliciously ruin your fun?
Or do you just assume that at game start and then quit having never really verified if they are by trying to play it out?
The topic I'm discussing is players making assumptions and how they act in game and treat each other outside game on the basis of those assumptions, the catalyst for this could be anything it just happens to be 3-gen SM in this circumstance.
It's relevant because the OP made a whole thread explaining why they enjoy playing 3-gen SM and I don't really see any malicious intent in their explanation, but that didn't stop the drooling masses from getting all riled up about it.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3541247#Comment_3541247
You effectively cannot progress the game in any reasonable way, that's the whole issue of this and why the deva want to change skull merchant... It is already openly frames as problematic and everyone knows that.
Back when locker saves were still a thing you had something similar, the killer could do nothing but grab them out of the locker until the flashlight was empty, that was basically holding him hostage, as he had no other option to progress the game similar to sm 3gen..
Also the die trying is what happens most of the time because they either DC or give up bc it is basically impossible to break without coms.
WE don't need to go around and shout anything, the deva already said it s problematic and needs change, it is fairly obvious that people are annoyed by it and if you still do it they will hate you for that's fair... We could as well say it is allowed to do but it is fairly obvious that people will call you out for it which is fair and also allowed.
I'm aware of this and have said it myself to some extent so if the devs are aware ask yourself am I attacking the bad design or am I attacking other players over it when I post about it?
I'm not arguing in favor of 3 gen SM, it is bad design. But you can try and play it out or you can sit around an whine about it till its patched out. What will you choose?
The OP felt the need to try and justify why the enjoy 3-gen SM, my point has always been they don't need to justify why they play or enjoy it because its a legit in game thing and until its patched out some people are gonna play and enjoy it and that doesn't make them bad people.
The concept of not hating on each other over game mechanics is really triggering to some people.
I gotta ask is this because they spend their day hating on each other over game mechanics and are trying their best not to feel ridiculous or petty about it, when in reality its nothing but ridiculous and petty.
-
@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.
Ah you are also resting on your assumptions.
I've never said its not a bad design and I've never had a go at anyone who had a logical take on "this is bad and why"
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.
Now does that make the people who play it terrible people in reality? No it doesn't.
But folks like you are hell bent on labeling the motivation of such players as purely malicious and out to ruin the fun.
Taking this moralistic stance and then using it to justify attacking each other online over something as trivial as a game.
That's incredibly unpleasant and breeds the kind of player toxicity that DBD is known for.
Stop assuming a player's motivation is some form of purposeful malicious attack on your fun. Such assumptions are clouding your judgement and likely making you more reactionary over a game.
If you don't agree with this assessment of your post, then lets highlight the fact that you've assumed my motivation here, that I'm complacent about bad design, I'm not but I know the difference between attacking game design and attacking other players for no good reason.
Ask yourself which are you doing?
-
@antag0nisticw0mble said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3541508#Comment_3541508
Killers can stack pwyf, and noed so hows that different?
"Players should get one speed boost that takes the larger of the two bonuses. That goes for killer and survivor."
Highlighted the important bit that invalidates your comment. Your welcome.
-
@antag0nisticw0mble said:
OK if after you hook one survivor as killer bloodlust is disabled.
How to sabotage the topic by making unrelated comparisons 101.
To the OP, it being only single use probably too big of a downgrade.
I think the big kicker is end game stacking with other perks for some serious speed. That needs to change first.
Players should get one speed boost that takes the larger of the two bonuses. That goes for killer and survivor.
Then they can start looking at its game impact directly.
You could even temper it by increasing the speed buff but actively reducing the hit speed burst you get, trading base line escape speed burst for a more sustained speed increase. Something along those lines.
-
Honestly its about the same, in fact I think its a lil better.
I do probably survive less than I used to but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Uber self healing and never being under any real threat while injured made the game kinda bland when playing survivor.
I feel like its more threatening than it was and as a horror survival experience that's kinda the idea.
Survivor shines when you are trying to avoid being killed rather than just sinking the killer's time.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3541094#Comment_3541094
The reason they don't want to play against bots is because it isn't fun holding bots in a match for them.
Stop defending people who enjoy making others suffer for entertainment.
Stop assuming the worst as people's motivation.
Its just as bad a habit and as I have said to you before clouds your objectivity.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3541099#Comment_3541099
There is a difference between that and basically holding a game hostage for an hour to make it end that way...
That's a game design flaw for the devs to look at.
You can still progress the game but at the moment its often too difficult to do so without dying so it needs changing
Its not really holding the game hostage as players can still attempt to progress the objective. (If BHVR has a different opinion on this they are welcome to correct me).
So rather than sit in game for 1 hour and moan about it, try and break the 3 gen and die trying if it comes to that.
If you are annoyed by the duration then bleeding out in 4 mins is shorter than hiding for 60.
Measurable in game outcome that is skewed will lead to change quicker than going around saying "such and such ruined my fun!" If you do say hey this doesn't work then you gotta frame it as "Hey this doesn't work" not "if some does this they are a jerk" these are the two different things which is my point.
One is an objective measure the other is a subjective opinion.
Until then much like other broken tactics that don't break any game rules you might face it in game. How you choose to react to that fact is often what dictates how legitimate your opinion is when it comes to game design.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540901#Comment_3540901
playing dropped pallets where killer has opportunity to hit the survivor and you have opportunity to outsmart killer is some the most interesting gameplay. what kind of gameplay are you looking for? pallet break and singularity EMP spam simulator? skull merchant 3 gen simulator?
Exactly this, I find so far that facing the xeno tends to be a game of ongoing chases and spread damage, there is very little down time while the killer just guards a hook or guards a 3 gen.
It's kinda refreshing, you gotta attribute some of that to a strong chase mechanic. Everyone moans about uninteresting play but when they get interesting play they want it nerfed because you can't just braindead you way through pre-drop pallets against it.
This community baffles me sometimes.
It reeks of typical mob think, where no one really knows what they want but if they get it they'll hate it because they don't know what they want and are angry about it.
-
Great breakdown.
I wouldn't say you are dragging down the average because by the numbers you are sitting in that meaty part of the center curve. My understanding is that DBD kinda balances around a 60-40 kill-escape rate which you are holding pretty well on target.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540723#Comment_3540723
Let's be completely honest about this particular post. Ruining the game for the other players isn't some kind of collateral damage side effect, it's the point of the play style.
You can't ruin the game for bots that way, which is why that's not an acceptable alternative.
Well the OP has tried to explain they are not out to ruin other people's fun and don't harbor any malicious intent to do so.
So this idea is already null.
I'm sorry but tactics that you don't like aren't game ruining and the intent of players who use them is often not because they are out to maliciously ruin your fun.
If you paint every scenario you don't like with that brush its very easy to get into a cycle of blaming other players for your lack of enjoyment and that's just self destructive when it comes to your own fun.
Something you don't like by all means say I don't like this and here's why, but to say people who do what I don't like should only play against bots is something entirely different.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540700#Comment_3540700
So they want the game to be exciting, but not exciting enough that it wouldn't be relaxed?
no you missed the point entirely. Re-read it.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540684#Comment_3540684
The of the question was more in the sense that when playing against as a 3 Gen skull merchant the survivor imput does not really matter, if all you do is hold that 3 Gen you will have a 1h long game of only kicking gens and resetting drones and it will be really hard to win as survs unless in comma and experienced, which won't happen often at all. The point is if what you do gameplay wise does not change whether it is against bots or against players, why ruin people's days? You don't chase people so it does not matter that the bots are weird in chase (terrible but also seeing you all the time...) And you cannot tell me it is about the BP, because you spend an hour to get a max of 40k base BP that's not worth the time anyway...
I get the point, thanks for the mansplaining there.
My point is the overaction to it is just laughable.
Essentially what is being said is "my fun is ruined because I had to play more DBD"
If the strategy continues to result in extended highly one sided games I'm sure it will be looked at, in the meantime people can try and play it out and move on or they can keep attacking each other about it as some kind of moralistic affront to gameplay out to ruin people's enjoyment. I know which strategy I'm taking and its far more pleasant.
-
Its framed kinda funny though.
If you are looking at what's being stated according to the OP flashlights are more essential to the game than server access is in terms of playability.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3540684#Comment_3540684
I asked why you wouldn't play against bots if all you're after is a relaxed Killer experience. I never said you should be forced to.
With the reasons they provided, I see no reason why they couldn't just play against bots.
Ok lets forgo the loaded nature of the question and answer it directly.
You don't get any bonuses playing against the bots.
A defensive non chase heavy game of DBD is still a game of DBD.
I'll usually throw in a game of basement trapper when I feel like it why, because I can still conjure up a 4 k just hanging around the shack. The process of defending that and locking it down and planning who to chase and how can be just as much fun as a full game of constant hunting and chasing. It can just as win/lose too.
As killer DBD can be played a few ways, some of those require more focus and some less but all are legit.
Basically you want a different game that requires less tense focus then you can probably orchestrate it, without giving up any of the tense fun and BP's that comes from PVP over bots. Even when using an easier tactic players can still surprise you better than bots can.
Basement Bubba, Hook web Hag, Basement Trapper, infinite tier 3 Murder Myers, all examples of less interactive play that can be just as fun as highly interactive play but require a lot less focus.
If someone chooses to play them then I'm not going to question their motives I'm going to try my best to play around it, live or die.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3539622#Comment_3539622
Why wouldn't you play against bots though if this type of gameplay is what you enjoy?
If folks quit and you end up facing bots well then you gotta be happy facing bots and you can change what you do to minimise that, but there is no obligation to change.
Demanding someone play only against bots because they may play in a manner that you don't like is a silly thing to expect to happen.
-
I'll post a lil additional here just to counter all the negative Nancy's. To the OP if I come up against you as survivor I'll try and break the 3 gen as best I can and die trying if I have to. No hard feelings and GG"s all round.
Its better to burn out than to fade away!
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3536326#Comment_3536326
Just because your teammates are sometimes bad, doesn't mean they should make your role overpowered to compensate for it. The problem there is your bad teammates. Name any other competitive team-based game, where having bad teammates means you should win.
A lot of players won't or can't consider mechanics beyond the 1v1 because the focus is inherently on self performance not team performance and the BP's and pips are kind of awarded that way too, so it exacerbates the inherent player self focus issue.
DBD is both a team game and solo game for survivor and BP's pips should be partitioned accordingly to self contribution and team overall performance.
Xeno is fine, people just need to spend some time playing it and playing against it rather than just screaming for nerfs in the first weeks of release.
-
lol for every buggy exploit some visionary finds a work around.
That's half the fun of buggy exploits, till they get patched out.
-
You don't have to justify (or rationalize) to this community how or why you play.
Are you having fun?
If yes then great keep doing what you're doing.
Its only a game but you wouldn't know it the way people react to it.
-
In any competitive setting people will exploit what they can.
Hopefully it gets fixed soon. Till it gets fixed just whack survivors farm up some BP's and report players who do it continuously without progressing the objective.
-
I like the idea and the 1982 version of The Thing is a license I'm eagerly waiting for.
-
@Feneroe said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3539057#Comment_3539057
Demo outranges the tail too.
Well there you go 'nuff said.
-
@LapisInfernalis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3537417#Comment_3537417
Hmmmm.... Deathslinger, Plague, Demo, Dorito Head...
They are all slowed.
Pretty sure all of them except demo out range the tail and demo could use a buff.
-
@Melinko said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3537604#Comment_3537604
Just play another match for adept... you mean like the survivors that have to do that because they get tunneled out? Or make the final trade on a face camping killer and lose it even though they played a great match?
It's an achievement. It's supposed to be difficult. Slugging is just trying to take a short cut to the achievement.
Lol yeah. If you get eliminated you’ll need to try again.
Someone slugging isn’t trying to short cut the achievement they are just maximise their time to find the 4th player which makes complete sense of you are going for the 4K achievement or otherwise.
Expecting someone to choose to play to the opponent’s advantage is one of the dumbest things people expect from an pvp online game, yet here that very expectation is rife.
This is the very definition of player entitlement. “I demand you play to how I want you to play, to my advantage and if you don’t you’re a bad person.” Sheesh.
-
@Thusly_Boned said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3537604#Comment_3537604
"Going for the max goal" is fine, but there is a spectrum of the lengths one will go to in order to achieve it. The near desperation for the 4K in situations like we're discussing is not terribly becoming for the player.
Sportsmanship is a thing, and simply because something is technically allowed does not mean it is justified. Hard tunneling or camping are in the same realm of being allowed but generally frowned upon. Skull Merchant players dragging a game out for 60 minutes to guarantee a 4K is the same on balance as a killer slugging a surv for minutes to find a hiding survivor is no better if you're looking at them both as "going for the max goal".
But none of these strats are being practiced in a vacuum, and decorum has value. DBD isn't a game of chess, it's an unbalanced party game where player experience matters.
I think it's pathetic behavior, yes. I think it's (or should be) beneath most people. That's not a legal judgment or condemnation, just my opinion. I'm not forcing it on people, just expressing it on a forum.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3537613#Comment_3537613
Yeah, once you're down to tow survs and one is down, the last one standing isn't going to be found on a gen unless they're a total potato. 99% of the time, once that second to last surv is on the ground, the last surv up is going to cease objectives and play for the hatch. And if the last surv is simply trying not to be found, they almost certainly won't be.
So what you'll end up with most likely is one surv unnecessarily bled out and a hatch game will ensue, same as if the surv had been hooked. Only difference is needlessly wasted time.
You’re over dramatising the impact of bleeding out.
It’s a legit mechanic and until BHVR change it for whatever reason expect to see it from time to time.
-
@Thusly_Boned said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3537562#Comment_3537562
Then go for it in the next. I have played a lot of killer (as much or more than surv) and have chased many adepts and countless tome challenges, but you have to draw a line somewhere. Well don't have to, but if you're gonna leave someone on the ground potentially for minutes to go on a wild goose chase, that is a line I won't cross. It's just really poor form, imo.
4Ks aren't terribly hard to come by, really, and not every game needs to be a 4K. Not every scenario where only one surv is up is opportunity that simply can't be passed up. 4Ks aren't currency.
Everyone has their own sensibilities, but I actively resent players who play like every 4K adds a year to their life or something. In a game with no real ranking system or substantial tangible reward, it's just kind of pathetic.
I can maybe excuse it if someone is chasing a really elusive adept they've been chasing for a long time (like if they've decided to try to get it when that killer is already at high MMR, which frankly is a result of poor planning), but that's about it.
99.9% of the time, if you have two survs left and one is on the ground but you don't know where the other is, hook the one and take your chances with the hatch game. By most definitions you've already "won", and the odds are still in your favor to get that last surv.
Yeah but you are asking your opponent to trade one inconvenience for another. "Just play another match for the adept rather than try for it in this match." Maybe you can excuse them if they have been hunting for a long time but you have no idea and simply want them to make that trade for your personal convenience.
Why, because I don't want to lay here.
You are right at that point you have already won but there is nothing wrong with going for the 4k, because it's the goal of the game after all. Calling people pathetic because they want to get the max goal, achievement or otherwise is just... well... an example of toxicity.
-
@BlueRose said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3537539#Comment_3537539
I can only speak for myself but I tell you why it bothers me a lot. I play games to have fun and being taunted by someone who is clearly beating me at the match makes an already unfun match even more unfun. This is why I don't go to the exit gates anymore and push ppl out bc I know all they going to do is teabag me at the gates, try to blind me, or act like they going to give me a free hit for points and just run out. It's like rubbing salt in a cut, it just makes the sting feel worse. You said move on to the next and that's what I love to do, If I have a really bad game and clear I'm not going to get a single kill I usually open the gates myself and sit in the basement in hopes survivors get the hint Im done and want to move on. Do you know what most do? They do not just leave, they stand at the gates or come to the basement to taunt me. I would love to just move on to the next game but sometimes I can't, I have to be focused to stand there for 2 minutes and watch these clowns. At the end of the day it's not fun for someone on the receiving end and you can say "get thick skin" all you want but some people can't.
Btw there are games out there that do ban ppl from bming in games. In this post, I named one already and that is ff14. Its pvp mode will ban you if you are reported to be toxic which includes taunting someone who you just killed by emoting on their dead body or using the fireworks item on their dead body. So this behavior could be banned if the devs wanted to.
I think key point is that even if taunted it can't hurt you unless you are already upset about the game condition.
"I play games to have fun and being taunted by someone who is clearly beating me at the match makes an already unfun match even more unfun"
The concept that the match isn't going well making it unfun is where this kind of thing takes root. You've undermined your own resilience to being taunted because you are already taunting yourself about the state of the match.
If you already feel its unfun when you're struggling then you've got nothing left in the tank as it were to resolve yourself against being taunted at over it.
The problem with banning people on the simple premise of offence is that anything can be offensive, so basically you can ban people for anything. Its a slippery slope.
You are never gonna stop people from gloating, especially in the online world, its far more effective to arm yourself with the tools to manage being upset about it then it is to impose highly spurious bans based on the incredibly subjective idea of offence.
With that power you can chase people out the gate and have fun no matter what the outcome, this is especially true with something as inconsequential as a computer game.
Some people might claim I'm just victim blaming but the reality is a healthy gaming mindset starts with you and then moves on to your interactions with others. That's the process by which you build resilience not resentment.
-
@Deathstroke said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3537447#Comment_3537447
Many of those games I just played effiently. As the one survivor is hooked I pressured others and tried to get another hook if it didn't work I returned to hook and got some trades that way. This I found very good way to pip. What I did just didn't give them any time to recover.
The first hooked I usually got then pretty quickly downed again and then took them out if good chance. Usually my first kill happened at 5 hooks sometimes it was second hooked too to get first out. Or whoever was easy. Earlier you can get someone out the better are chances.
Only few games I went my way to just kill one survivor no matter what when it was neccessary to win/pip that game and that still is big risk as if it fails it's certain depip. 3vs1 is sometimes hard to manage too when there is 1-2 gens and if you take one out there is risk the other 2 don't save each other if they're not yet hooked which is really needed to pip. But I found ways to win/pip.
Yeah that makes good sense.
If you don't enter a new chase in a timely manner or if the unhook comes when you are still really close to the hook, which is very common, then It makes sense to return and pressure the two survivors at the hook.
In a lot of circumstances the most logical person to pressure is the injured one not the other way round. Especially if they body block for the un-hooker and use up their endurance.
I just always find it odd that the target that makes the most sense to chase (which often involves "tunneling") is perceived by many to be some kind of toxic aberration of normal play than just a completely normal choice as part of the game.
You gotta make that call though because if you sink a ton of time chasing a good survivor simple due to their hook state then its a de-pip.
-
Its really not toxic. Its just like in all things 4mins feels like an eternity if you have to wait, so people blow it way out of proportion when they have to wait.
During this time a lot of them sit there imagining all the malicious intent their opponent must have in slugging them and project all their anger and malcontent onto them so that by the time the 4 mins are up its been an agonizing endurance at the mercy of some horrible monster out to ruin their fun... rather than just 4 mins.
When most cases tend to be I couldn't find the survivor to pick them up.. so they bled out.
If people want the mechanic changed they need to stop hyper-focusing on the supposed toxicity of it all and look at the mechanic pragmatically.
- Is less than 4 mins enough time to be repeatedly slugged throughout the game and not prematurely bleed out? Could they shorten the timer?
- If only 1 or 2 players left, both slugged and unable to pick themselves up do we need a button to end the bleed timer and die?
- If they had a die button how could they stop players using it to avoid moris or deny achievements or tomes?
The bleed timer is the solution to being slugged, without it you'd just lay there till the killer felt like hooking you.
The primary question seems to be how long is too long. Because I guarantee if they make it 3 mins, then after a while people will be crying that its too long to wait 3 mins! But if they make it 1 min then people will complain that they never had the chance to be picked up because the bleed out timer is too short!
Personally I think 4 mins works, maybe they could try 3.
-
Everyone's motivation to play is different, its why solo Q can be a crap shoot because you may have a mix of competitive players and casual players mixed in.
I would consider myself a fairly casual player but that doesn't mean I don't go for the 4k as killer that's the goal.
I find that play tends to reflect who you're playing against, if the survivors a sweating and burning through gens then I'll tend to sweat a bit too to keep it on an even keel. Not always but that would be the main reason to go for the win in the "sweatiest" manner.
The other reason might be the lucky snowball into a game where you really dominate, sometimes its just better to close it out and move on to the next one.
They would be the main reasons. I don't go into games with the intention to play as competitively as possible but if the tension ramps up I'll adjust accordingly.
-
Not bad advice, it can work well on a lot of killers in the roster. If up against a team that's smashing the gens it can really swing it to get it down to 3v1 as soon as possible, so it stands to reason that making it your main aim every game can make it easier to avoid de-pipping.
What I find weird is the people replying that you could, or should, just "play normally" as if what you are suggesting is outside the realm of normal play.
If you want to kill someone early by all means kill someone early, managing 3 survivors is easier than managing 4.
-
I agree.
But as a bigger fan of Alien than Resident evil (and rightly so!) I may be biased.
-
Just as fun as always, more so with Xeno.
Stopped for a while because hey I played a lot of it and basically got bored.
So many games out there that I wouldn't say I play a lot of DBD anymore but I still play enough.
In the meantime I've also sunk hundreds of hours into Age of Wonders 4
Played through another full run of Evil Genius (the original) as Maximilian
Finished NOLF 1 and 2 again.
Got a mirrored version of classic zoo tycoon and built a dino park.
Painted a bunch of miniatures, played a bunch of boardgames and went on holiday.
If you're feeling burned out or bored then the simple solution is change up how you play by switching sides play more killer or more survivor, or cut back how much you play and do something else for a bit. I mean its a game not a job.
-
Exactly this put in a lil time and learn, that's what some players are not willing to do.
The "it's hard nerf it" mentality will bury gaming in general.
-
@LapisInfernalis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3529738#Comment_3529738
Most killers with ranged powers get slowed a ton when they ready it up. X3no does not get slower. It does not even need to wind up like Huntress.
Neither does it have the range of huntress or other ranged killers.
-
Well lets flip the question on its head and ask is it fair for the last survivor to basically be a guaranteed kill without the hatch?
Hatch (in its current form), much like endgame collapse, stops that 1 hour search for the last hiding survivor in an endless standoff.
You still have the major advantage as killer if it comes to hatch plays. So it serves a purpose and isn't unbalanced in any real direction.
So yeah hatch escapes are as fair as they come.
-
While some of the things listed may be unpopular mechanics, personally the only example of genuine toxicity here is 'being nasty in endgame chat'.
One could make the argument that the rest is just gameplay, now gameplay may be obnoxious but that doesn't necessarily make it "toxic."
While as Peanits so eloquently pointed out trash talk and the mechanics of trash talk have always been part of gaming does it's presence make a scenario toxic?
I don't think so... and before anyone says I'm only defending it because I do it myself that is gross assumption and completely incorrect.
But what I will do, and always have done, is say people can play how they please and this is a monstrous game where the monster can be just that... monstrous.
But it's all make believe and while bleeding out, for example, may be a generally unfun mechanic its that very unfun lack of participation you are trying to escape from.
The fact such things create a visceral reaction in players that they would go so far to call them toxic is part of what makes DBD so great. There is genuine threat to your ability to play the game imposed by the antagonist. That's one of DBD's strongest points. It's what makes it effectively emulate the slasher flicks that inspire it.
I firmly believe a thick skin is a necessary part of succeeding in life in general and if you are crumbling in the face of very inconsequential video game mechanics to the point you find it the toxic equivalent of real world abuse, then you gotta take a step back and ask...
- Am I being to sensitive about this?
- Do game mechanics need to change simply to facilitate my sensitivities?
-
Great fun to play and play against.
A killer that's truly scary and requires a bit of thought and a lot of luck to avoid when in the right hands.
Back to the classic days of DBD when it payed to avoid the killer at all costs.
-
Yep I miss the old trapper sack that just gave extra carry.
Not being able to move traps is the most worthless thing and I have so many of the dam things now that will never be used.
Avoid it in the the blood web like the plague.
-
"It's never a good game except for the person who won." That's the recipe for no fun right there.
If you only have fun when you win, then you are not much fun.
-
So basically the introduction of one killer that people still need time to get used to is going to irreversibly break the mmr system resulting in every survivor being down ranked and every killer being inflated?
Thus destroying the game as we know it. Jesus does the government know about this?! I think people need to chill.
-
Who are these people staying in game for ages and ages?
Try breaking the 3 gen, if you die then move on to the next game. Hiding in the other side of the map while the game drags out then complaining about how the game dragged out is just silly. Go for the goal and go out in a blaze of glory if need be.
Old cat saying “It’s better to live one hour as a tiger than an entire lifetime as a worm.”
-
This one has all the hallmarks of the complainer’s play book.
Lets go down the check list.
boring check
no counterplay check
some other annoying thing you’d rather face en mass. Check
No constructive feedback check
missing specific reference about toxicity and lack of skill, but I think the last line implies them in some way. So I’ll say check
Lose points because there isn’t a hyperbolic example about how extreme something is and how it always happens.
5/6 ain’t bad I think we could make a new drinking game based around this.
-
You didn’t try an crawl around to known hatch spawns in the event you might get to hatch out. That’s what I try and do.
Also you are using being bled out as a reason to remove dc penalties which is basically asking for a whole game altering effect to be implemented so to avoid a very minor in game effect.
DC penalties are there penalise people throwing games and quitting, it has nothing to do with facilitating your lack of patience.
-
@mizark3 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3531790#Comment_3531790
I largely agree, but you have to at least have a chance of victory. I love Ping-Pong, but if you put me against an Olympic Athlete I'm not gunna have a good time. Single-player games are at least designed with that chance or path to victory that you can learn or overcome. A multiplayer game with a player with thousands of hours compared to "naw bro I don't need to play the tutorial, WASD moves right?" isn't going to make the person play again. If I keep playing that same single-player level, I can learn and beat it, but if I keep versing that same person with thousands of more hours than I, I'd probably only win if I got lucky.
Yeah for sure. Like I said match making is borked. But if one or two bad games is enough to turn you off playing for good then maybe we need to go back to games being really hard by default so we can cull the weakness from the gaming population.
Turns out being able to mostly counter the process of natural selection hasn’t really made us stronger as a species. Modern games are a shadowy reflection of this fact.
-
Yes MMR is borked but I've started to relish the challenge of the bad mismatches.
I'm begining to think the hand holding of modern games has given rise to a bunch of easily intimidated children.
Load up an old sega and try to survive the first levels of Zaxxon, by the fourth loop your skin is so thick it makes DBD's post game salt look like the bleating of an angry jelly bean.
-
@nekomrade said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3529766#Comment_3529766
making something fair/reasonable is not dumbing it down. i understand wanting a scary mechanic but maybe this is not the way to handle that.
People always put it behind the shield of fairness, but basically the more fair it is the less scary it is.
What makes a movie monster so monstrous?
What makes over coming said monster such a great experience?
The answer is the same for both of these questions... its not entirely fair.
The monster has the advantage and sets the tone and the survivors struggle against the odds to succeed. Anything less is a bland wet noodle of an experience.
-
I'm glad there's no telegraph, too many things in this game have a wind up warning you they are coming.
Good to see an actual scary mechanic again that I can't just predict and have to really spin and think to effectively dodge.
Please don't dumb it down BHVR it's great the way it is.
-
great game, gonna have to give this a try