tennmio
tennmio
About
- Username
- tennmio
- Joined
- Visits
- 457
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Punitive said:
I think it is. This meta perk has saved more lives than the peniciline vaccine itself, lol. Not only dead hard though, but also those perks that grant you a second opportunity with not a big penalisation. Of course, they are necessary, I can't realistically tell you the time I found it as a last resource and saved my life. But this not hide the fact that many of those times in which I used it was because I was the ONE who made the MISTAKE, not the killer. Interestingly, if you compare DH to the other exhaustion perks out there, they clearly work diffferent: live, sprint burst and balance landing are the ones which can reallistically create a gap between chases but these must be triggered anticipately and clarly one of them awards you from playing efficiently: smash hit. In my opinion, this last perk should conserve the benefits of the actual cooldown. In a sum, players should be penalised for their mistakes in game and not be encouraged to use meta perks because they save you again, again and again. This is what encourages a positive core of a balance skill-based game. Though, you played poorly, you get penalised. You play effectivelly, then you are rewarded. No big deals in that. I hope you can understand my point.
First of all penicilline isn't a vaccine (you shouldn't spread misinformation even if it is a joke cause you believe that no one can be so uneducated that they don't know this. There will always be someone that'll prove you wrong) it is a medicine used to treat bacterial infections. This whole year dead hard was a on and off at least on console. It only works 50% of the time at the moment and only worked properly for about 1 or 2 months in total this whole year. Therefore I don't see another problem with dead hard then the fact that it isn't working proplerly on every platform.
If you seem to have a problem with dead hard on survivors while playing killer just adapt to it. No big deal. Assume everyone got it and make sure you don't get outplayed.
-
@wewantbetterfun said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMeIC4ulo0I
The original video is around 7 minutes long, I did 3.5 gens on my own, unhooked 3 survivors, healed 4 of them, took 1 protection hit and looped the wraith for around 4-5 minutes total, and laurie didn't do a single gen when she could have done 3-4 all on her own, Survivor Q sucks so bad.
I play solo mostly if I play survivor. I know how it feels. From talking to these people I believe they're just in the wrong game. They seem to think that stealthing around and getting the hatch is a good way to play. Some even believe they're good at the game.
All we can do is hope for killer players to punish that playstyle and hope they don't get the hatch as a reward for their antimate behaviour.
-
@Fuzzels said:
I mean, some people like to play the game in a very stealth and lone wolf way. I agree with you about it not being very good team play, but the fact is they bought the game just like anyone else, and they can play it how they want to. If they wanna stealth all game and watch their team die on hooks, that's their choice and they are more than free to do so
How is someone entilted to behave however they like to just because they paid an x amount of money? That must be a childrens or american way to see things... . Just because someone has some money doesn't mean they can do whatever they want.
If you are refering to the game rules you are right. There is no rule saying you cannot play that way.
Only if someone plays like that they should at least be aware that they have no right to complain about anything that can count as selfish behaviour (camping, tunneling, getting slugged, not getting saved, not getting healed, being left behind, others not doing the objective, others killing themselves on 1rst hook or leaving the game as soon as they get downed etc.). Unfortunately those people are entilted enough to complain still. And those kinds of people can never be good at that kind of game as it requires teamwork. If someone isn't playing as a part of the team they are not only useless, a hinderence and annyoing but also playing the wrong type of game.
As killer I have gotten a lot of those stealthy players that unhooked someone on death hook and sneaked away believing that they'd get away with it. And every now and then they complain that I didn't give them hatch or if I camped and tunneled them only (with everyone but them escaping. Whenever I tell them why their answers sound very entilted and crazy. I don't understand how they even dare to compain when they aren't getting their way with their selfish behaviour.
-
@Katzengott said:
I stopped reading after "red ranks". At least OP understood that it just shows playtime. There are no ranks anymore, we have grades now. And as you can't really lose progression anymore, it's almost impossible to not reach iridescent (red) in a season when you just played enough in one month.
No not everyone is playing an amount of time that will get them to red ranks. If they actually play that much, they should at least have basic knowleadge
-
@Tiufal said:
Most players are just bad. Even many players with high amounts of playtime dont get the basic done. Dont know why, but thats my experience playing and watching the past 4 years.
That is what I don't get. How can you play and not pay attention one bit to catch up the basics?
-
@FranzDerPalme said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2599155#Comment_2599155
Yeah I understand what you're saying I also don't quite know where it all began. Back in the days it was also a problem, but it was not quiete as bad it seems to be. People used to say thx after the match and tunneling wasn't that much of a deal. But maybe it's just how I remember it.
I do (if even possible) write to every player if they show decent behaviour (it is a bit of work on dbd). Usually thanking them for fairplay. It's not even much work as it doesn't happen very often and it is easy and fast enough to write a thx in between two games. Oftel while I type (I have to type every single letter with my controller and it takes a while) I get some message asking me if I'm going to complain because I died or something similar and a lot seem surprised getting a nice message. I guess that says a lot. Bet you got some storys about that yourself o.o
-
@[Deleted User] said:
Yes. It's been reported to the team thankfully.
Thank you for the information. Happy it is reported already.
-
@AGM said:
Yes. For some reason brown medkits start with only 99% of their charges. Not sure about the other kinds of medkits, but it's definitely happened to me with brown ones.
Ah thanks. I thought I was somehow missing something. Good to know it's just another bug
-
@FranzDerPalme said:
I think in general the game would be a lot more fun if most killers wouldn't try hard that bad. Even in a 4 man match if the killer camps, tunnels or slugs it is often just really annoying and I think that's one of the biggest reasons why people are toxic.
I'd say it would be more fun if players did not try hard as much as they do.
I agree that even in a 4 vs 1 tunneling and camping from the beginning take away the fun for all 4 survivors and I can't really imagine a killer having fun playing like that neighter. Not sure how much killer you play, but rude, provoking and unfair behaviour can be found on both sides wondering who started it seems like the "chicken-egg-problem" if you know what I mean. What I noticed is that it is more likely on my platform to message survivors than killers that is one of the reasons why I wanted to address this here. To survivors I am usually able send a message in game.
-
@TheDuhJ said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2598547#Comment_2598547
Surprise, your expectation don't mean sht until you have the power to enforce it. Give people some incentives to be nice and maybe e you will get it. The world isn't gonna cooperate with your ideals just cuz you think they should. And whining about it aint gonna do sht
Do you really believe that I think that expectations are anything else than expectations? No, I don't.
Just to make it clear: I am not the author of social norms. Maybe reading my statement was the first time you've ever heard that these social rules based on morals exist, but I certainly didn't say or claim that I invented them. Though I am happy you learned something new. Btw they also tend to differ (slightly) based on culture.
Luckily there are a lot of people out there in this world trying their best to be a good person every day. Maybe you need to meet new people if you feel like it is different.
If you read what I've writting you could have been able to figure out that I believe that feelings or showing feelings is nothing to be ashmed of nor do I agree with shaming feelings or someone for showing them. Having and expressing feelings is natural and part of being human. However I wasn't trying to express my feelings, but pointing out unnecessary and unprovoked unsportsmanlike conduct. Moreover I was trying to rise awareness and force self-reflection regarding the behaviour shown by anyone.
I hope this clears it up a bit. I guess I just didn't use the right words as english isn't my first language.
-
@AkiTheKitten said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2587053#Comment_2587053
I don't care about rando's judgment. My own fun is all that matters :)
What? I am so surprised to hear that from you of all people... Joke aside. I believe we all were able to figure that out already, but I appreciate your honesty.
-
@Raccoon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2589202#Comment_2589202
Most people that have stopped replying have most likely already chalked op's tirade up to self-projection and a deficiency on their part.
Your analysis is certainly poignant and will hopefully cause them to pause for self-reflection.
Anecdotally, I've been destroyed on stage at various fighting games during my career - I've been teabagged/taunted in between hits during infinites in MvC2/3, popped off on when I can't burst during Overdrive in BlazBlue, etc.
After the match/tournament, I was usually buddy buddy with everyone, having a laugh and slamming drinks with these very people, while also being invited to side tourneys/cash games, movie hangs, etc.
Being unable to disassociate someone's in-game actions/persona/rp(in some cases) is absolutely a deficiency in mindset and understanding of reality vs fiction that only serves to limit your interactions in any community.
I beg to differ. I think they realized that they ran out of arguments.
- One cannot compare a game like dbd with fighting games, as those are 1 vs. 1 and fair in the first palace. If I play a shooter game and get downed I've just no played as good as my opponent (if they didn't use a cheating device that is. Like a Cronus Zen for ps4 for example).
- If they decide to tbag in that case they are poor winners or probably under age (for real or just developmentally) and shouldn't play that game in 1rst place. Tbagging etc. (a stranger) is an unsportsmanlike conduct and there is no understandable explanation to behave like that. As it is an act that is carried out exclusively to dominate, humiliate and provoke the other person.
- "After a match....." -> What are your reasons to be friends with someone that likes to dominate, provoke and humiliate you and/or others? I usually delete anyone that carries out that kind of behaviour to anyone without an understandable and fair reason (getting tbagged before from that same person before or comparable. It doesn't matter if they tbag me, someone I know or a total stranger. To me this is an indicator for their values, morals and often for their personality ( I usually tend to wait and watch first. See how they react if they get treated the same way).
I don't keep anyone showing unsportsmanlike conducts on my friends list as I refuse to enable or tolerate that toxic behaviour. And they all know the reason why I deleted them.
4."Being unable..." I have a lot of experience in that field and I might have some backround information that you might not. Not trying to insult or anything like that, but this kind of information isn't really something you learn through school or everyday live. Without the knowleadge I would understand as to why you argue like that, therefore I assume you might not have that information. I guess we all kind of learned that our brains have synapses and synapse connections. What most might not know is that whenever we repeatedly act in the same manner this strenghtens the connection of that kind of behaviour in the synapse connections. This leads to the fact that regularly used synapse connections develop and are accordingly activated more easily (even unconsciously). What is the difference between, for example, a novice driver (must take every step consciously and with cognitive effort) and an experienced driver (many actions are carried out automatically and the driver is not even aware of it).
--> Why would I explain that: Well it is the same way with unsportsmanlike conduct behaviour. If you behave like that unconsciously, because you trained that behaviour unknowingly, you'll have to loose realization and selfreflection unless you get it shown to you. Some people might not even realize that they behave like that, because they just act like "the others" they encounter. This repeated behaviour becomes unwillingly and unbeknowst part of their behavioural repertoire. The synapse connections activating that behaviour will not only be easily activated in online games but in any situation. Our much used synapse connections aren't able to assess/evaluatereal vs. virtual world they just activate in similar situations. The brain just doesn't work like that. It cannot unconsciously seperate real and virtual situations or what behaviour is adequate online and offline.
I guess if you knew that you wouldn't have tried to use that as an argument so I won't held it against you as I didn't know or expect this to be a thing before I learned it. It just isn't part of common knowleadge.
-
@Bullettimegod said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2588334#Comment_2588334
My sabo build says otherwise
Haven't thought of that, but yeah that is a good example too.
-
@slendermansmoom said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2596703#Comment_2596703
uhhhhhhhhhhh wut
i was being sarcastic
I am sorry but that did not get to me.
-
@AkiTheKitten said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2596510#Comment_2596510
Sending harassment because someone played in a way you don't approve on in a game is petty af. Just move on lol
Expecting to behave in any way you wish and not getting called out for it is petty af and infantile. Just take responsibility for your actions.
-
@AgentTalon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2596744#Comment_2596744
I absolutely do not view DBD as something I would call "Human Interaction". There is no voice chat, no chat at all (PS5), and only the occasional msg via PS5 party. Survivors and killers are just bots with differing difficulty levels.
If so you have no reason to get upset about messages that refer to dbd and your behaviour or their interpretation what your behvaiour is based on in your character. But I assume that isn't the case.
-
@AkiTheKitten said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2596611#Comment_2596611
I don't care if they complain tho, it's not my problem lol
I am pretty sure anyone is able to comprehend that your statements don't make much sense and that you keep contradicting yourself. I you didn't care you wouldn't have to disable messages at all cause it wouldn't bother u. You don' want to admit it, fine. But don't expect others to not pay attention to that. Btw it is normal to care about other peoples judgement. It is a good thing actually as only people that have mental impairment do not care for real. Anyone without that impairment will care, avoid it (through behaving according to social rules or through explaining their wrong behaviour to themselves) or deny their responsibility.
-
@burt0r said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2596848#Comment_2596848
Both sides are just as guilty.
It has become a war, of which noone knows who started it but both sides keep the wheel of toxicity turning.
Some indivuduals are guilty and those can be found playing both roles in this game. Some individuals make it a war. I'd say it is a war between those that want to behave "rightfully" entilted and selfish whilst expecting others to accept that vs. those trying to behave fair, respectful and treat others in the way one would like to be treated themself.
Dunno how it is difficult for anyone to asess which group is the root cause of the toxicity.
-
@TheDuhJ said:
this is a game about callous murder, what do you expect from these people?
I expect the same from every person. I expect everyone to always try their best to behave like a decent and good person in any situation or circumstance.
-
@Fobbo said:
They can play how they want. They paid for the game and want to play it their way and have fun
Do I understand you correctly? If someone paied for something they can behave in any way they want to? I don't think that is true. No matter how much money a person throws around them they are going to get judged harshly if they behave in a manner that is unacceptable. No matter how much they paied for whatever. I don't really care how much money someone decides to spend or can spend. I only care for behaviour that's it.
-
@CashelP14 said:
Mate it is, unfortunately what it is.
Had a game where the first survivor dc'ed immediately. Legion then tunnelled me for 4 minutes and face camped me. Only got 4 gens done in that time.
The only reason 4 gens were done was because 1 survivor did 3 of them, while the other followed me around with a flashlight and missed the easy save.
Some people just aren't good enough even in a 4 vs 1.
Exactly what I mean. Some are entilted and behave selfish.
-
@Whiffycow said:
I understand your frustration, and have experienced it myself, but I feel your anger is misplaced. The killer isn't responsible for your experience, nor the survivor theirs, though some killers do try to give a show. It's best if you view the killer as an NPC, then it's easier to see the quitter is the problem. They're the ones that handicapped the survivors by leaving and reduced the possible points available to both you and the killer. Quitters are weak and spoil the match for both parties. I main survivor, but when i'm the killer I don't expect the survivors to let me do things if I'm being owned simply because i used a BP buff. We shouldn't expect someone else to make up for the bad behavior of another, we should expect the one doing the bad behavior to get better.
I don't know what NCP is, but I guess I don't need to. I view every killer player and every survivor player as what they are: people that are responsibile for their decisions and actions at all times.
If you feel like not expecting some kind of other people that is fine. But I do have expectations on how humans are supposed to treat each other. Giving up on those expectations and the related actions that I take would mean to enable and accept behaviour that I feel is unacceptable and that is obviously not only behaviours that I don't like individually. Accepting and enabling of bad, selfish and harmful behaviour isn't really something I am willing to do.
You are right: We shouldn't expect someone else to make up for the bad behaviour of someone else. BUT we shouldn't accept someone taking advantage of someone elses bad behaviour neighter!
-
@Sabraiz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2588205#Comment_2588205
Here is the thing, I actually agree with you that killers should take it easy if someone rage quits. I know I did not communicate this in my post.
But I do heavily disagree with the way you are acting here, you are insulting every killer that does not do what you want as selfish, tryhard and toxic. When it is actually you that is being selfish and toxic.
Are you being nice, empathetic and good when you are complaining and projecting all the responsibility of your fun to the killer?
Have you considered that maybe the killer in question has circumstances where they want to get into the next game quicker?
Where is your empathy that the killer might only have time for one or two games this week and wants to get done with a challenge that requires them to hook four different survivors in one game and when one survivor rage quit that was completely ruined?
Context matters.
I am not "insulting every killer that does not do what I want" as selfish or tryhard. I label behaving in certain ways as people that show selfish or tryhard behaviour. If you show tryhard and selfish behaviour, you behaved tryhard and selfish- that just how it is.
"When it is actually you that is being selfish and toxic" -> Am I? Why do you believe that? What kind of thing I said got you that impression?
I am not sure where that "toxic" comes from, care to explain?
"Are you being nice, empathic and good when you are complaining" -> Does that mean that you believe that someone nice, empathic and good isn't allowed to point out wrong behaviour and complain about it, because that makes them not nice, empathic or good?
"and projecting all the responsibitly of your fun to the killer?" -> How am I doing that? The killer player is responsible for his/her actions just as much as the survivor player is for his/her actions. Not once have I said that only the killer is responsibile. Nor am I projecting responsibility to anyone. I am reminding everyone that we indeed are responsible for our actions and that it is our responsibility to act on the neccesities of each situation and that we have to take into account other peoples needs at least a bit IF we see ourselves as good, nice or decent. On cannot claim trying to be a good person if they're just behaving in a selfish manner, ignoring other peoples needs etc.
Overall this whole post wasn't even about me or my fun. It was about the behaviour that I whitnessed in a game (that went pretty ok for me, just that I felt pretty bad for the others).
"Have you considered that maybe the killer in question has circumstances where they want to get into the next game quicker?" What -if not something selfish- would that kind of circumstance be? It's not like the killer knew beforehand that someone was going to dc/loose connection. So that person must have assumed that the game would be about 10-20 Minutes.
-> And in that situation. From experience I know that the "need" to get into the next game quick, isn't as important as getting all 3 remaining survivors. Never have I ever experienced a unfair and selfish playing killer, that claimed that he only played that way because he wanted to get out of the game and onto the next one as quick as possible, not slug for the remaining survivor, they all did that. None of the killer players contacted (that claimed they played like this to get it over with asap) was able to explain as to WHY they slugged the prelast for nearly the whole 4 minutes bleedout in order to find the last survivor.
It's not like the killer is gonna get out of that game faster, if he/she plays like that, in order to get their challenge done. At that point letting survivors gen rush would be faster.
Might be a coincidence. !So if there is someone out here that had a tryharding killer in a 3 vs 1 (from the start) with 5 gens remaining and did experience that the killer if the survivors started to tryhard as well, not slug if needed, please speak up!
I do have experienced killers that obviously just wanted to get to the next game. But they didn't slug nor did they care for the last survivor at all. But the weren't camping and tunneling hardcore nor slugging in the end.
"Where is your empathy....." I've had that happen to me and I know it is very frustrating if you really want to get a challenge (or throphy) done in time and you don't have much time left. But I am not a fan of behaving selfishly. I might not have much time to get it done, but how would they know? I would be selfish to just put my needs over the 3 other people. Apart from that I don't like camp and tunnel and slug as it isn't fair and a good person (that as I said I am trying to be) wouldn't behave that way. When I was in that situation, I just went to do something I had to get done anyway, as soon as I realized that I couldn't finish my challenge that game due to the dc. But not before asking the survivor player that dc'ed (luckly from my platform) why they did it.
Btw I do believe the context matters. But how'd you know if the survivors were doing a challenge too?
Being empathic as survivor is more stressful and requires more cognitive load than as killer. Because as killer I only have to be empathic to one role, the survivors I am chasing. So the best I can do is play fair, give everyone a chance to breathe, do a gen, save and heal and have some fun. But always taking into account how they behave towards me and their fellow survivors throught the game. For example If I realize that 1 survivor always loops nearby gens that are worked on or by hooks, that survivor is acting selfishly and will probably die. If I see a survivor taking a hit for another survivor that they unhooked, that was something a good person would do, so I'll monitor if they do that for wglf stacks or if they are truely trying to do the right thing. I monitor survivors that sandbag others, trying to find out who is the one that started it/ who is the one that doesn't deserve to escape.
As survivor I have to be empathic to three other survivors and a killer. I am constantly balancing the assumed needs of 4 individuals, always taking into account how that have behaved throughout the game and if their behaviour was ok and what kind of action is required to make it fair, respectful and fun for everyone. As survivor I monitor how the other survivors treat everybody else and I assess how much I'll help them escape. If they tbag or try to annoy the killer, I won't help them at all. But I'll try to help the killer instead. If the killer is tunneling I'll try to make sure he/she has a hard time getting the target. If the killer camps I'll happily make the nearst gen right next to the hook. If the survivor camped tbag or annoy the killer I leave them on the hook. If they get unhooked by someone else I won't heal them no matter how long they follow me, I'll just shake my head and point away from me.
Not saying this is a perfect system, but it is the one I've come up with to use the influence I have in order to make the games as fair and respectful as possible for each individual. During the challenges I'll try to assume what challenge everyone has to do at the moment and I'll try to figure out how to make sure everyone gets what they need plus trying to get my own challenge done (but I try to not put getting my own challenge done above the others).
-
@Sluzzy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2588272#Comment_2588272
Survivors can't deny the killer a fair and fun game though. The killer is the only one that has the power to do that through camping and tunneling. The killer can sit still the entire game and still get 4 BBQ stacks and walk away with 20K points. Survivors can't do that.
A swf group that makes new accounts and bullies those that just got the game, denying any hooks. I guess that is something a lot of beginners have experience. It was even easier to derank with the old system. Survivors can treat a killer badly too and make sure that the killer won't get many bloodpoints.
I don't know how often that happens nowadays but it is possible. Though I don't think it will be possible if the killer player is more experienced. That is something I have called people out for in game a lot.
If I realize that the killer isn't very experienced I assume that being in a lobby together is the games fault and I try to loop like a "baby" survivor in order to give them a good feeling about themselves and a chance to learn something, too. I try not to let them know that I could've easily escaped cause if I was in their position I wouldn't feel good. But believe me it isn't as easy as it sounds. And the nature of this is that they (hopefully) don't know that I gave them a short chase and hooks and most likely a kill for free.
I am not saying the survivors have to give the killer a 4K, and it wouldn't be good with the current system as they'd face survivors even stronger. But giving the killer a hook or two should be possible. Unfortunately the killers can camp and tunnel and get an easy kill like that even if they aren't good. Therefore it is a little bit tricky to get survivors give the killer some points.
Some years ago it was pretty easy but it isn't anymore. Being nice to the killer most probably gets you killed, so I do understand if others don't want to take the risk for whatever reason. As I don't care for escaping or bloodpoints anymore I tend to do it.
But as I stated you are right. If the killer has some experience it isn't possible to deny them bloodpoints. At that point they can only deny them themselves by facecamping.
-
@Karma_Susui said:
As a survivor main myself I can understand where you're coming from, but just because a teammate dc's doesn't mean a killer has to play by your rules. Sure you brought bp offerings but who cares. Bp is pretty easy to get and there are plenty of other ways to get it.
I am not a survivor main. And I have played this game for long enough to not care about escapes, kills or bloodpoints. All I care about is decent behaviour, fairplay, respect, etc.
I am simply a trying to be a good, empathic and decent person that tries to bring awareness. Toxic behaviour isn't good for anyone, no even for those exhibiting it. It multiplies and starts in small things. If I see behaviour that isn't ok I, as a person trying to be a good person, have to say something.
-
@MrOogieboogie said:
Problem is, most ppl are selfish tryhards....in and out of game.
Can't be most... can it?
-
@AgentTalon said:
Killer - Kills
Survivor - Escapes
DCs or Perk or Offerings don't change any of that. Coming to the forum to ask people to be "nice" is just crazy.
Your opinion. I don't think that is crazy at all. I believe it is crazy to break down a human interaction into what you said. As if any interaction has ever been that simple. If it was we wouldn't be here having a discussion and if it was there wouldn't be wars. Would be a good thing but unfortunately that is far from reality.
-
@Labrac said:
Funny how people complain more about the person who is following the rules and playing the game than the one who broke them (the DCer).
I'd rather just move on to the next game. I'm at a point in DBD where I don't need BP anymore, so I don't really care about hooking everyone 3 times. Sure I'll not stand at the hook staring you, but if I see you and you just got unhooked don't expect me to ignore you.
Cause there are many reasons that someone dc's. You don't even know if it was on purpose most of the time. I've been disconnected or had my game crash in obvious and less obvious situations (obvious= in the exit gate or when working on a gen or whilst hooking a survivor or closing the hatch; and in less obvious= shortly after loading in, when my hex got broken, when all gens got done or when I got downed as survivor).
Moreove in my opinion the biggest problem isn't the few ones that do something wrong or are deliquent on purpose, but those that enable, ignore or reward the behaviour of the few that really have malicious intentions. Like their behaviour only can have an influence on the game (or in any situation for that matter) if people enable it or take advantage of it.
For example: If a child decides to bully another child it wouldn't work one bit if the bystanders and enablers would behave correctly. If they show the bully that his/her behaviour isn't accepted the bullying does not work.
-
@copperysinger5 said:
The real tryhards are the survivors that come here to this forum to demand killers to obey like a pet. It's a video game! You play to win, the opponent plays to win. A video game is not the place to seek strangers to give empathy and sorrow for your losses but a psychiatrist office is.
Any human interaction (yes MULTIPLAYER ONLINE games count as that) is based on morals and norms. You simply cannot have and interaction without that. Maybe you don't like it, but you'll still have to endure comments on your behaviour, discussions (like this one) and you don't get to be offended by people judging your behaviour.
You should inform yourself as empathy (emotionally) and sorrow aren't things you will get in a psychiatrists or psychologists office. But you should be able to get that from any empathic, decent and good human being.
Btw just for your information: I am not a survivor main, nor am I "demanding someone to obey like a pet". I simply am a person that tries the best to be a good and decent person every day. I try to not look away and I refuse to be quiet about wrong-doing and selfishness. As I consider lack of empathy (emotionally and cognitive), selfishness and unjustified immoral behaviour in any form, at any place and at any time as the root cause of everything bad about humanity.
-
@slendermansmoom said:
I see i see
time to ignore everything you said and use my tombstone myers with ruin, devour, monitor and abuse, deerstalker and putrid oak and camp, tunnel, slug, nod, and jumpscare the survivors
SOLID GAMEPLAY
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/SH3JM7L8B0GJ/download-282-29.jpg
Someone wants to feel superior, powerful and threatening, instead of using arguments in a discussion? At least that is what I understood from your message. Kind of interesting... . But I doubt you really wanted to show that much of yourself. I guess you just didn't realize how much that says about you.
I am sorry. You know, we all know that life can be hard sometimes, but you do have some power to decide for yourself in your own life. You don't need to try and scare or dominate others, I bet you do have a talent or something in real life that you can be proud of. Something that is enough to let you know that you don't need to try to dominate or hurt others.
Just accept yourself, with your flaws and mistakes and know that you (even with all that) will always be a worthy and lovable person <3. Hope you get better soon :)
-
@Sabraiz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2586482#Comment_2586482
Yea, call all the killers that don't want to do it selfish and toxic. Like it's not selfish to demand others to do something you want when a third party ruins it for everyone else.
Wanting to end the game quickly as a killer is neither selfish or toxic, they just want to get to the next game and hopefully play against people that don't rage quit. Nothing wrong with that.
only their own miserable life matters
Nice attitude you have here, acting like the killer is ruining your life when they also are a victim of the rage quitters. But no, then turn around and put all the responsibility on the killer to make sure that survivors have a good time. And you constantly complain how trash or miserable others people lives are because they want to move on from a match quickly? How selfish and toxic aren't you?
I have been in multiple games where some random teammate just disconnects the moment they are downed and it is frustrating in the moment when you can't even do something in the game.
But damn check your entitled attitude.
Do they really ONLY want to get to the next game? I am pretty sure (from experience) that the mayority just wants the survivors to jump on a hook and kill themselves. If they try to get some points most killers get angry. They start to hit the survivors on hook, if they dared to loop them for 3 gens with 2 survivors remaining that are working on them.
If they really only wanted to get onto the next game, why would they tunnel, camp and then slug for the 3K when the survivors turned the game around? I play since the game was first time free on ps4 and never have I ever witnessed that. I've had multiple games that we nearly or even won with 3 people and every time the killers were trying so damn hard. Using whatever advantage they could get.
Whenever it got to the point that there were only 2 survivors left they slugged. Every single time. So tell me: Is that a killer behaviour that you would call "just want to get to next game"?
I wouldn't. I don't, even trying with all I got, see any sign or indicator in that of "just" wanting to get to the next game. IF they just wanted to get to the next game, they could go afk and it would be over much faster when it comes to the point that the survivors are trying get play the game in order to make an escape possible.
So you better check "your damn entilted attitude" and maybe you want to have a look at your line of reasoning.
-
@AkiTheKitten said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2587101#Comment_2587101
Or I could just mute in game chat and ignore them, because I play however I dam well please
Cause listening to someone complain will totally impede you being able to "play however" you "dam well please".
XD Haha sure makes a lot of sense your line of reasoning.
-
@manyhours said:
don't be selfish and expect the killer to prolong the game just for you.
It's boring to play a game against 3 since the start. It's better to just do some chases and finish as quickly as possible so we all can queue again to a normal game.
So let's assume you get in that situation as killer. How do you proceed, if 1 person dc's at 5 gens?
What exactly do you mean by "finish as quickly as possible"?
And is finishing as quickly as possible your main goal in that situation? Do you do everything possible in order to not "prolong the game"?
I am indeed very curious about your answer. Cause I am pretty sure that it isn't just about not prolonging the game and finishing as quickly as possible, but insteadt about feeling powerful and domination.
-
@AkiTheKitten said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2587635#Comment_2587635
So the huntress is terrible for doing her job as killer? Bro go outside
This was about how certain people KNOW that the'll get messages, because they know exactly HOW they're playing. XD I mean I thought this was obvious. If the survivors do a missplay in the beginning you can take advantage of it or take it easy. You can assume they might have gotten into your lobby accidently because of mmr working wrong. You can know 3 people brought bp offerings and let them take a breath and take it easy a 5 gens remaining. Or you, like that one did, be selfish af and just hook 1 and slug the other 2 and camp all of them.
If you or anyone behaves like that, yes you'll have some people, including me, assume that you are not an empathic (emotionally and cognitive), respectful and good person. Moreover I assume that most people that behave like that have messaging disabled, because they know that they get messages and comments. I guess they know that they are behaving selfish and that they expect messages like that.
Tbh every single time someone here complaints about getting so many ""unfair", insulting and rude messages" and even messages that aren't approopriate, I am pretty sure that the messages they get are most probably fair unless they aren't appropriate (like life threats and comparable).
Haha I just saw what you posted b4. So yeah I guess this applies for you as well... . Like I said I am not afraid of getting a message, but some people are. They are because they know that their behaviour is looked down at and that they are getting judged so they decide to ignore it or better make sure they don't even get them. It is easier to tell yourself that you are not doing anything wrong and that they way that you behave is okay if you don't even have to face any consequences to your actions. But somehow they do konw what they are doing is wrong, cause if they didn't they wouldn't have a problem with getting an unjustified message in the first place.
-
@fogdonkey said:
What would happen if only one survivor would be allowed to escape?
This change would spice up the game a bit. At the start the survivors need to cooperate to not get killed. But as we get to the end of the game they need to get more and more selfish.
What do you think? Any ideas how could this concept work?
No I don't like it at all. I'm playing this game cause it is teamwork based. Like don't we have enough selfishness in this world and game already?
-
@DaWeezerd said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2587961#Comment_2587961
This guy really out here trying to guilt trip. gtfo.
Some comment here leave the impression that not everyone is capable of feeling guilt... . If I am mistaken, that would be a good thing. I honestly hope I am wrong. And yes I kind of am inducing guilt.
That is how morals plus emotional empathy work, you know? People know that something isn't considered ok, they feel guilt and remorse if they do it anyways. Not doing something considered wrong in society because you know that people will judge you in a way you don't want to be seen. If there was no such thing in society we'd face really harsh problems. Every person is capable of selfish behaviour, some have a harder time to no behave egoistic compared to others, but everyone could if they decide to do so.
If everyone did, the world would be a different and less enjoyable place.
Just some people have gone through life thinking that they are entitled to behave selfishly all the time and they don't realize that if everyone did they wouldn't have it their way anymore. Isn't it better to take your needs and wants back every now and then and consider what other peoples needs are, if everyone does it? Even more so if what you'll have to give up on isn't even that big (like staying in a game a little longer and play fair, like you are still going to win you just give them a chance to have a good experience without loosing anything but some time (and maybe sadistic pleasure))?
I'd say yes. Imagine how playing this game would be if everyone altrustic, fair and respectful would leave... . I have a feeling (compared to when I started to play) that we've already lost a bunch of good people. When I started there has barely ever been anyone tryharding with no need to, no one sandbagging (only maybe in friendsgroups for fun without targeting randoms), no one getting others to believe they want to farm but then if they see the chance kill everyone instantly. All that sadistic behaviour, bringing someone to the hatch but hooking them beside it. Letting someone open the door to kill them right by the exit, etc. There was nothing like that the first year maybe even two playing this game.
I am sure that not pointing out the wrongdoing, not "guilt tripping" (as you call it) lead to this situation where that kind of behaviour is a daily.
Toxicness leads to more toxicness, so I rather have people feel guilt tripped then enabling toxicity. And this starts in the small things, as fairplay, respect, taking responsibility and adjusting ones behaviour to the situational circumstances.
-
@Sluzzy said:
Reading through the comments shows that it is BHVR's responsibility to ensure their game is fair for both sides. There is too much "trust" in the overpowered Killer role to ensure the match is fair and fun. Survivor perks, like Decisive Strike, need to be buffed for multiple uses with a pausable timer so it can't be exploited. Camping needs to be way more punishable. Survivors need more ways to escape the match so there is no no-win scenarios that killers can exploit such as sitting on 3 gens.
This was just 1 example. I can be the other way around as well. And it's not like morals, fairplay and respect only apply to killer role.
-
@DaWeezerd said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2585863#Comment_2585863
You know, 1 survivor dcing when I'm playing killer isn't my problem.
How you decide to behave is still your responsibility.
-
Any human is able to assess the need of actions in a certain situation. If I realize that I am going against chill players or unexperienced or whatever I don't have to tryhard to win. No need to tunnel or camp. Doing it any way even if really unnecesary is what makes it wrong.
-
@Sabraiz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2586482#Comment_2586482
Yea, call all the killers that don't want to do it selfish and toxic. Like it's not selfish to demand others to do something you want when a third party ruins it for everyone else.
Wanting to end the game quickly as a killer is neither selfish or toxic, they just want to get to the next game and hopefully play against people that don't rage quit. Nothing wrong with that.
only their own miserable life matters
Nice attitude you have here, acting like the killer is ruining your life when they also are a victim of the rage quitters. But no, then turn around and put all the responsibility on the killer to make sure that survivors have a good time. And you constantly complain how trash or miserable others people lives are because they want to move on from a match quickly? How selfish and toxic aren't you?
I have been in multiple games where some random teammate just disconnects the moment they are downed and it is frustrating in the moment when you can't even do something in the game.
But damn check your entitled attitude.
What would you call people that behave like that? Nice? Empathic? Good?
Why would anyone that is nice, empathic (emotionally and cognitive), altruistic and good behave like that? Right, they would not. A satisfied person usally feels no need to act sadistic, selfish or toxic. That leads to the assumption that maybe those people are not very satisfied and therefore try to feel better about themselves by behaving in those ways.
The responsibility of ones actions lie by those people. If someone dc's they are responsibile for it and no one else. If it's a 3 vs 1 everyone is still responsible for their own decisions and actions according to the given circumstances. You cannot blame the person that dc'ed for your decision to go all tryhard. It is your responsibility at that point.
Like you all remeber when killers could get stuck on trees and in paletts? I had rounds getting stuck with different outcomes based on what kind of people I was playing with. Everybody knew that the killer could get out if a survivor let's him-/herself get downed and picked up. Getting stuck was the fault of the game, it was a buck and no one was responsible for it. I experienced both. Toxic survivors that taunted me, bullied me and farmed bloopoints off off my situation. And I had survivors helping me get out of the situation that wasn't my or their fault. That exactly shows the difference of a good person and the others. They did not have to help me to get out and get their bloodpoints. But those that decided to help me get out, are the good people.
-
@DaWeezerd said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2585863#Comment_2585863
You know, 1 survivor dcing when I'm playing killer isn't my problem.
That person did not say (nor did anyone else say) that it is your or anyones problem. But not_Queef is right saying that it is sad that people like you are offended by the mere suggestion of fairplay and empathy.
I'd extend this statment saying that it isn't only sad but also worrying. And that you indeed are always at all times responsible for your decisions and actions. As well as the fact that you don't get to be offended by being judged for your behaviour.
-
@FluorescentLemon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2587721#Comment_2587721
I know, but when it comes to DbD I do unto others BEFORE they can do unto me
Selfdefence. But that means that your behaviour is part of the problem as you are starting it. If you are ok with you starting toxicness off you go.
-
@FluorescentLemon said:
Because I don't owe you anything and I'm not a bot for you to exploit.
Well yes, no one playing in an online multiplayer is a bot. It's all human beings. Therefore it is a social interaction and everyones behaviour can be judged by anyone. The behaviour is real and can influence the other people. Therefore you are responsibile for your actions.
-
@Raptorrotas said:
I think survs expecting killers to play
stupid.nice are the selfish ones.How is it selfish to expect everyone to stick to fairplay? Please explain, cause that just doesn't make sense.
-
@adirgeforthedead said:
In other circumstances, I'd agree with you, but during these events both teams turn extensively toxic towards one another. I've been trying to have normal games as Killer and I get nothing, but flashclickers and people who swarm up at me whenever I get a down and proceed to bully me. So, I can't blame Killers for wanting "easy" games too.
Whenever I get a DC, I try to play normal, but chances are another people will DC and all I can do is give the last person hatch or door depending.
You say show some empathy, well, you should try to play Killer during these events. Believe me when I say Survivors can be just as toxic.
I play killer ;). I play both roles equally. I experience some games like that too, but it isn't the mayority. If the survivors decide to play toxic, no one expects the killer to be nice to them. I have never ever heard someone saying that if survivors tbag and flshlightclick and swarm you, that you are supposed to be all happy, nice and let them bully you.
Why would toxic, selfish behaviour be ok in any situation? Guess what: It is just not ok.
-
@th3 said:
Some of the replies here are why I no longer use BPS or Anniversary offerings
I just had a game with 3 people bringing bloodpoint offerings and no one except for the killer got more then 9.000 bps. A Huntress on coldwind. The player disabled everything messages, friendrequest etc.
As if this person is not aware of how terrrible they behave?! I have nothing disabled cause I am behaving like a decent person and if I fail to do so I take responsibility for my actions. But those kinds of people are just children-like, entilted and refuse to take responsibility for their actions.
-
I am getting a little tired of writing the same thing repeatedly.
To everyone feeling entitled to play how they wish that expect for others to keep quiet:
Yes, as long as you follow the game rules you can behave however you like to in the game. But your behaviour does not vanish into nothing cause it is a game. Your behaviour is real and if someone calls your behaviour out you'll have to live with that. Yes, you might not like it or feel like it is not justified, because you seperate your behaviour in game from reality. But the way you behave in game will cognitivly and emotionally affect other real people. Therefore you don't get to be offended by their critique or judgment.
If there was an in game communication and your behaviour would be commented as you act you wouldn't be as surprised by the judgment and critique, so why would you be if you get the judgment after the game? If you think about it you'll realize that it doesn't make any sense.
If our actions in social interactions have an influence on other people, we have to accept that they might respond to our behaviour. Simple as that.
-
@AkiTheKitten said:
Your fun is not my responsibility
Right, but your decisions and actions are indeed your responsibility. If you don't like being judged as selfish you'll have to adapt your decisions and actions. If you don't want to change anything. Fine. But you don't get to be offended if your actions cause critique. You'll have to live with that, just like everyone else has to put up with your behaviour.
The people you treat however in the game, are people during the game and they will still be people after the game. If they decide to tell you their judgment about your behaviour, you'll have to endure it.
-
@Winchester89 said:
Is the Survivor Rulebook for Killers a real rule book? Every 2nd round dc'd a Surv. Should I be nice all the time about that?
You decide how you want to play based on whatever you value. But you don't get to be offended if your actions cause critique. You 'll have to live with that, as much as other people have to put up with your behaviour.
-
@Hex_Llama said:
There are two kinds of people in this community -- the ones who see this as a social interaction between five people, and the ones who see it as five solo interactions with the game. I'm in the first group, so obviously I'm going to try to let people get points if they played a bunch of offerings -- that's what we're all there to do. People in the second group confuse me.
Same :)
Like how can someone on the one hand get offended if they get a critical message about their behaviour from a person but on the other hand believe that they can treat the other people in the game however they like to? As if they're really surprised that they were interacting with people. How can the criticism be real to you, but the interaction isn't because it happened in a game? Makes no sense to me unless I add egoism and entitlement.