twistedmonkey
twistedmonkey
About
- Username
- twistedmonkey
- Joined
- Visits
- 5,349
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Joao_Bandicoot said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/589456#Comment_589456
He is not saying to be harder to pip, just less forgiving on losing a pip (there's a difference here).
It's one and the same thing. Not safety pipping means you will derank more so staying in the ranks and progressing towards the red ranks becomes harder.
This means there may not be enough players in those ranks increasing queues as before and another side effect is that it makes it easier for players to depip and bully lower ranked players.
Someone's pip is in the hands of other players as much as their own. How the killer and the other survivors chose to play can also affect how many points you can gain. It's not always how well you do but how bad the others play.
-
They tried making survivor pipping harder and it caused longer queue times at the red ranks.
I don't see how doing the same again will wield different results.
-
1 - No it would just create longer matchmaking, the game has maps which are survivor or killer sided and each one would just chose the ones they deem the least sided for them.
2 - I dont know about killers as they are built to counter setups and why they can see survivors, they may not have frnaklins on the killer they chose and the survivors have full loadouts of flashlight and toolboxes for an example. What needs to happen is for survivors get locked in before killers so they can setup properly and also at the same time make it so they can no longer dodge that lobby.
3 - I think the timed idea is the best so far to punish DCers as it works even if its an issue with real life or internet as it gives them time to sort it out. It also stops the hatch DCing for SWF as they cant play for a while meaning they all have to wait longer.
They do need to look at the hook mechanics and those who kill themselves instantly also, maybe remove the option to struggle until after 30 seconds and you still get the same amount of chances, on the second phase no more button pushing just make it automatic and you can again chose to end it after 30 seconds so you get at least 60 seconds of them on the hook and a chance to save.
-
@go1gotha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/589211#Comment_589211
I think my idea is bad and further discussion is pointless. Not because the idea itself is bad.
Before introducing such big changes, it is necessary to put in order the game that is now, and this is being done so far and is being done very slowly, it is still far from ideal and the concept of "balance." Therefore, this idea is simply impossible at the moment, an impossible amount of work for these developers, maybe "someday."
It was worth thinking about it before creating a discussion.
The overall idea of making survivors unique is not bad at all its just very hard to do using their perks or lore.
The idea has been discussed before in other forms such as they can only use their own teachables or them having a base difference using a percentage of one of their perks but the non meta ones. Like Claudette 5% further on empathy, Jake 5% quieter when injured, meg 5% less distance for vault notifications etc but some survivors still had less attractive attributes over others and it didn't make it worth using over others in reality.
-
@go1gotha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/589177#Comment_589177
Now there are also characters that are taken most often, we do not lose anything.
So each character must have at least one really strong perk for players to use this, this is already a question for those who are engaged in balance in this game. A bit of work and the game will really become more diverse than it is now.
Yes but people chose characters on looks alone right now so you do see more variety than your idea would create. You what little variety there is.
It also makes survivors much stronger one perk may not seem much but on top of the current meta which is used primarily to help prolong a chase they can now take a perk for faster healing or action speed making it even more unbalanced and creates a larger gap between new and old players.
More perks is just a bad idea as it makes balancing even harder as is making meta survivors.
-
This creates meta characters instead of just meta builds.
If you look at the current meta perks they would just chose one char with one and then be able to use 4 other perks with no downside.
It would create less diversity overall as some survivors have perks no one uses.
-
@anarchy753 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/587751#Comment_587751
That's clearly wrong, as ONE outfit for Pig is more expensive. 1 outfit for Pig, 2 for Tapp, 2 for Ash and 1 for Ghostface, all licensed cosmetics, have been regular price. This is blatantly a test of what they can sneak through and what players will still pay.
Your making assumptions as no one knows what deal the devs had to make.
The licensee holds the rights and can ask what percentage they want from each one.
There is nothing to say the people who own the rights didn't want to have a larger percentage for the pig itself. Hence why I said probably as it possible.
You also can't compare Ash or Ghostface as they are not the same company to work out an agreement with plus they were made when acquiring the licence. Ghostface also only the mask the costume is bhvrs own.
As for Tapp well he is a skin with nothing unique about him over other survivors so any company would see charging more would not be worth it so won't sell as much if prices too high.
You can continue to be upset because a cosmetic in a game not needed which is optional is too expensive in your eyes. If that's the case don't buy it.
-
@anarchy753 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/589062#Comment_589062
No more exclusives (EXCEPT THE PAID BATTLE PASS, BETTER FORK OVER THAT CASH)
You do know if anyone can get it then it's not exclusive. I guess you just wanted to vent about the battle pass.
-
The don't ban people for showing something outside of the game which is not bannable in the first place.
You need to report them to the platform they are using and hope they do not advocate cheating being shown.
If the offense is bannable then yes they can do something. This happened to a streamer who showed how to so something which was bannable live on stream.
-
The problem you have is a reward such as this was generally advised before hand giving people a chance to earn it like legacy for example.
Giving an exclusive reward using prestige isn't going to happen as its very easy to do nowadays. It also kicks the ones who enjoyed playing him and have all the perks unlocked who deemed it not worth it. They could have put in just as much time afterall.
Then there are those that hardly played him and have him P3 with all perks unlocked just because they could.
It's not as easy to differentiate between who did what and why they gave a heads up for the likes of legacy.
Just remember when legacy came about the was no entity eater, the bloodwebs were double the size if not more. The perks and items cost more and they had no offering for 100% bloodpoints or perks it was the true grind and they would have spent more getting one character to P3 than someone now on multiple ones.
The devs have also stated there will be no more exclusive skins.
-
It's an over complicated system when a simple timeout for those that dc over a time period is simple and automatic.
Say its over 24 hours.
1 dc 5 min
2 dc 10 mins
3 dc 15 mins
And so on.
The devs already said they are working on a new dc punishment with dedicated servers.
-
@Chatkovski said:
I also think they are too expensive.
Generally, a game does not take money absolutely everywhere, but it chooses one or two methods.
- Incomplete game : paying.
- DLCs : paying.
- Cosmetics : paying.
- Battlepass : will be paying.
- Soon an extra subscription to play DBD?
The incomplete game should already be free (this would bring new players) and refunded 75% of the open price in auric cells to players who bought it.
You do know that the only thing you listed needed to play the game is the base product. Everything else is optional and never needed including the dlc's.
@anarchy753 said:
People keep saying "vote with your wallet," yeah, WE KNOW. People are already protesting this Pig outfit because of how blatantly greedy the devs have gotten.
That said, voting with your wallet doesn't mean you can't voice your opinion here, and sadly it almost never has an impact.
When have you EVER seen game devs go "hey, we heard the feedback from you guys that we're money hungry and charging insane amounts for cosmetics, we'll lower the price a bit."
And keep in mind:
THIS IS A PAID GAME WITH PAID DLC WHICH IS STILL USING MONETISATION METHODS OF FREE TO PLAY GAMES THAT NEED TO MAKE MONEY OFF COSMETICS.
A licenced character probably has to pay royalties for everything sold so the skin would obviously be more expensive than non licenced ones.
You have a choice to buy or not. The price is irrelevant as it's the customer who dictates it. No sales mean no skins or lower prices. Wanting something cheaper just means the devs have made a good product and you are upset you feel it's not worth it. Wanting and needing are not the same and we generally pay more for luxury items than those needed.
I'd rather they keep skins high priced and the dlc low as at least that is a new addition to the gameplay. Would you rather they lowered fluff items and charged more for dlc? I never buy skins as it's a silly concept to pay for a look when it doesn't change the game in any way.
I am thankful to those that buy them though as they keep money coming into the game so they continue to work on it.
-
Self care is good playing solo but not with SWF. It's not needed but it's more reliable when you have Survivors that save you with we'll make it and run away when the killer isn't even close.
It actually saves more time than running around finding someone else to heal you. Unless you are right next to someone finding them takes both of you off a gen and equates to more lost of gen time over all its about time management.
The same can be said for exhaustion perks and why I never run one as its a waste in a chase if the killer is competent. No perks are needed, good or bad, it's just what someone wishes to use.
-
@DaS_only said:
Not gonna lie, some people have some heavy double standards. BBQ&C showing up just twice in the shrine and is otherwise locked behind a DLC paywall is fine and not pay2win. But paying for bloodpoints which only reduces the grind is pay2win? Doesn't make sense at all
Didn't you make the post about being afraid of the monetization in the game? Selling the one thing which does give players more add-ons, items and offering is the only p2w aspect that is possible in the game. It's also why the best killers are free.
The fact BBQ has been in the shrine gives everyone around those times the chance to get it. It's not locked behind a pay wall if there have been chances to get it for free.
Do you honestly want survivors to be able to buy the worst killer map offerings, purple flashlights with best add-ons, Insta heals or killers having the best rare or strongest add-ons, offerings at will just because they spent more money?
-
Paying for bloodpoints can never happen as it's the very definition of P2W. You can pay to buy more of the strongest and rarest add-ons gaining an in game advantage.
The game itself needs to stay as play to earn with pay options for DLC and cosmetics only.
-
If your not enjoying it the best solution us to take a break and play something else.
Personally I punish those who camp and tunnel by doing gens and leaving as only one or two at the most should ever die. I dont worry about pips and make it a game within the game to stealth and get out asap.
The problem with solo is the others can feed it but then it's fun to see them complain so I ask them "why complain when you rewarded the strat?".
-
@SpaceCoconut said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/587093#Comment_587093
I'd like to direct your attention to the news story about the very young and Special Needs individuals in the EU who fell victim to predatory monetization recently with your statement.
While there's some truth to what you say, there is also truth to what I'm saying and the stories from my truth should make any normal person question some monetization practices.
What that says are those who have special needs may need other security measures in place such as the parents being more aware of what they let their kids do online. That is still blaming a game for lack of understanding on someone's part and while the kid themselves don't understand it's the parents responsibility for one not to allow a child to use their credit card as even those without special needs really have no concept of the value of money until a later stage.
A kid will ask for anything and everything in a toy shop. Do you think those same parents would you let them have the credit card to use freely? It's the same in principle when a friend has something they want and feel left out it's just now it's not the parents fault it's the companies.
When I setup my nephews ps4 when he was 14 I put in my details for the plus purchase and removed it straight away. I purchased PS cards for any purchases needed or a retail version which he repaid some by saving money over time. I made sure my card or anyones would never be used. I also setup the account so I had access to everything he did so he knew not to abuse the privilege he had and he never did. His parents asked me to as they weren't sure how too. That's the issue again lack of understanding.
Letting a young kid have carte blanche with any money is a very silly thing to do.
@sorrowen said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/587093#Comment_587093
Why do you think games like Fortnite make billions every year? they prey on people who are loose with money or kids who don't know any better. I don't see how Bhvr is any better $10 a cosmetic add's up really quickly although I believe the cosmetic/graphic designers are really good one of the few departments who do their jobs right.
This statement screams of what I mentioned. It's never the person who spend the money fault. They couldn't help it. That skin and pass were just too attractive to not buy it. It's all that damned companies fault for offering it to me and giving me no choice.....oh wait I actually did have a choice. I chose to buy it so It was actually my own fault.
You can guarantee the vast majority of people that buy them know damn well what they are doing even the ones who say they didnt or can't help it. Those that buy and chose to ignore the implications act ignorant to their part of the blame to pass the buck due to a mistake they feel they couldn't help but make.
I guess the same can be said for shoplifters afterall they just couldn't help it, its an addiction so why punish them? I can see that happening eventually in this world as no one wants to take any responsibility for their own actions.
-
@SpaceCoconut said:
When it comes down to it, the core issue I have a problem with is the predatory nature of some monetization systems.
The current cosmetics shop isn't predatory since the items are available permanently and some are available through shards. I feel no pressure to obtain any skins.
The incoming battle pass does have a predatory nature with the time limited availability meant to take advantage of players who are susceptible to these kinds of tactics. Along with the assumption that the pass won't be purchasable with iri shards, it makes for a system that doesn't reward players for grinding in the game, but punishes them for not paying for the premium grind.
The point I was making about netease is that any monetization system that comes up in DbD mobile may come to the main game, which I can't imagine is a good thing for us as consumers.
Also, the profitability of the mobile gaming market is also it's biggest problem. I don't know of a single game that doesn't have some form of predatory monetization. This is also part of the reason many countries are looking into these systems to see what regulation may be necessary for it.
The fact that BHVR is implementing these systems focusing on the money rather than the customer experience shows me that we as players of their game are only as valuable as our wallets.
It's just an opinion, but one that many share.
When you see predatory I see optional.
You are putting the sole blame onto the companies and nothing onto the consumer for making bad monetary decisions.
That's the same as saying anything limited edition is predatory no matter what company sells it be it a special edition game or an item of clothing as someone will always feel left out. They can chose not to spend it but when the do spend more than they can afford for something it's not their fault?
I wish I could have done that with many things I've bought in life. Sorry I felt forced to buy that last drink at the bar each time as I would have missed out before you closed.
I really dislike this modern culture where no one has to take any responsibility for their own actions as someone puts a label on it and passes the blame onto someone else.
-
@snozer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/584430#Comment_584430
but you are part of the consumer base by providing an extra player for the whales to play against. you are the cattle that they need to keep the whales happy and spending.
This is why they provide a "free" part to the battle pass and "free" skins that can be bought with shards by making you spend a hell of alot of time to grind them.
No actually I am simply part of the player base who enjoys the game. I am not part of the consumer base for the pass or shop or cattle for the "whales" I just enjoy the game.
The reason people can grind for it is to tease people into buying it. The mentality of those consumers who will buy it are either supportive of BHVR and want to get the skins along with having the money or they see it as missing out.
The latter is an issue with that consumer not being able to seperate a want and a need. I need food and water I never need skins for a game.
-
Correct the key is pre determined. when the trap is set on your head the key will come off 100% when you go to the right box.
The RNG part comes into play when you have multiple boxes to search. If there are 4 boxes you have a 25% chance to find it in the first, 33.3% for the second and so forth.
-
While myself and many asked for more stealth play a long time ago the devs really seem to not want to go down that route as instead of adding the requests they released more and more stealth killers instead along with not making the emblem system reward it.
The problem with stealth is right now urban evading stealth players can make for a very boring match, the devs themselves state want interactions between the players and engaging chases with mindgames. Like it or not looping has become a gameplay mechanic.
I dont think your thread is correct being titled "The way the game should be" as its just how you would like it to be. The game is what it is and the devs vision.
-
While I personally don't buy skins from any game as its well just fluff imo it is the market that dictates the price.
No buyers means lower prices or no skins at all. If people pay and they sell alot then the price is on point.
I think they are expensive for what they are but that's a personal opinion. The actual dlc is cheaper which is good and if the price of skins helps keep it that way I'm all for it and thank those who do purchase them.
-
Maybe it's a licencing issue. They may just have it for Amanada and would need to discuss or pay more for another char from saw to join the game even as a skin.
-
@George_Soros said:
What is the F word?
@George_Soros It's a homophobic slang word used in some countries.
-
@MonsterInMyMind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/586148#Comment_586148
Im going to guess english(England) correct? I know over there its used in regards to a cigarette but yeah no they used the full on word in regards to what happened i cant exactly say it as it breaks forums rules.
Close, Scotland.
Yeah it's not a commonly used term here for the past couple of decades. My American fiance did mention it when over for a few months when my friends mentioned it in regards to a cigarette.
The same went for her shouting out that she smacked my fanny out in public.
Sorry again and yes they need dealt with as it's disgusting to use such hate in a game. Hopefully your reports get actioned quickly.
-
@martin27 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/586132#Comment_586132
We're not talking about the 4 letter F word, were talking about the F word used as a discriminatory word again homosexuality
@MonsterInMyMind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/586132#Comment_586132
"abusive or threatening speech or writing that expresses prejudice against a particular group, especially on the basis of race, religion, or sexual orientation."
Google defenition.
Clarification helps thank you. Yes that is hate speech then.
Where I come from the F word phrase isn't used in connection with that word. Sorry for the confusion and I hope they get dealt with.
-
@MonsterInMyMind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/586114#Comment_586114
You are aware what the f word means correct? that falls under a target towards someones sexual orientation so therefore it is indeed hate speech.
Also just because a word does not offend you does not mean it does not offend someone else if you really want to get into what classes as hate speech im sure we can go that route but i can assure you its hate speech.
Since when did the F word imply someones sexual orientation? The f word is an act which can be used by any one no matter their sexual preferences.
Now depending on what they say after the words use can imply something different but that is down to the context of what they write in its entirety after it's use.
Again I didn't say I condone the words use in games. It'extremely rude and uncalled for but it is not hate speech if it is used alone with nothing to follow it regarding my post above.
Maybe the F word me and something else where you are from but to me it is a sexual act which has 4 or 6 letters in it.
If you are meaning the homophobic F word then yes that would be different and come under hate speech. Sorry I may have misunderstood.
-
@MonsterInMyMind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/586075#Comment_586075
It falls under hateful speech which is a temp ban you can find the perm and temp bans here https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/19450/game-rules-and-report-system#latest
Hate speech isn't the same as internet trash talk and while I dont condone being rude to others it's an ugly side of online gaming.
Definition - Hate speech is talk that attacks an individual or a specific group based on a protected attribute such as the target’s sexual orientation, gender, religion, disability, color, or country of origin.
@martin27 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/586075#Comment_586075
So hate speech is just trash talk to you, so what would you call a hate crime just playing around.
Nice assumptions read above. I simply stated what it was not that I agree with those that do it.
-
I thought they did change it to those times a while ago but not for long and reversed it back.
I don't think calling someone the F word is bannable and comes under the trash talk banner.
-
They play like that because it works.
It's a strat they have adapted to using so you dont get the unhooker. It Seems quite a smart way to play.
-
@RaginRendon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/583971#Comment_583971
Mettle of Man was the whole reason why everyone bought Ash, but after the nerf i'm pretty sure that the majority of players got triggered. Like yeah it needed a nerf but not like this!
I never bought Ash for that perk so not everyone did.
If people bought it thinking it would stay in its current state then more full them tbh. It was obvious a nerf would have to happen even when it was simply announced.
They did over nerf it and make it useless so at this stage is prefer them to just rework the perk and make it do something else or it will end up another DS scenario where we get a few changes over 2 years until it gets to a stage where it's semi ok.
-
The monetisation has been happening for a long time and it wont stop anytime soon.
This was evident when the cosmetic store first came about, regardless the battlepass is happening and even though some vocal people were not happy about it nothing will change that.
What DBD has become and is becoming isnt anything different from other PC/Console games as cosmetics and battlepassess are becoming the norm for a lot of online games. Its a sad fact but what can you do? the only reason they do it is because people will pay for it.
Personally as long as its never becomes a P2W where you can by boosters to gain more an advatage in game I dont have an issue with any monetisation. I for one will never be part of their consumer base for those as I have never bought skins or battle passes for any game.
We do know the mobile game as it is now is free but it only gives 2 survivors and killers the rest and how you get them is to be determined but I would say they may be pay only for the majoirty of them.
If DBD on PC/console does go down the whole mobile game route then it would be bad for the game and their business imo but atm they dont seem to be and are just following what other online games have been doing so I am not so worried. Horvath did specifically state that the battlepass will not have any P2W aspects as he said it was a frequent concern raised by the players.
-
Why is this post still going? I'd bet none of those complaining have actually contacted twitch themselves.
Stop blaming game devs for a problem that lies with twitch.
I'll say it for the fourth time in this thread.....
Twitch could easily solve it by allowing streamers to ban players from viewing their stream but they don't. Direct your anger towards them and stop badgering devs of a game when they explain the problem can lead to possible false bans.
The problem with banning a person for one streamer is that all then want it done no matter how obvious it may be in one scenario. Plus for the extra reports to go through it can cost more money to each individual game dev to handle them.
Go to twitch and fight for your loved ones if you want a this change to happen.
Get onto them so they allow the banning of IP's (max week only due to dynamic IP scenarios), emails, usernames etc and then the power is put into the hands of the streamers.
Stream sniping is a problem and a scummy act but it's not on the game devs to sort out a streaming platforms lack of banning options.
-
First get Leatherface for BBQ so you can get 100% extra bloodpoints if you hook all 4.
After you get the teachable pick a killer you like to play and get the perk on them. The DOC is good for farming points.
Then don't worry about the end result and just farm for points to get your other killers levelled up to how you want to build them.
Don't worry about prestige as it's just bloody clothing.
-
It's amazing how many people have disabled chat and profiles due to toxicity in this game.
This is why people have asked on PC for the links to profiles to be removed.
Deathgarden is a good example of what could be done. They dont link to anyone and simply show a name after the match. You also don't see their profile in the recently played with steam menu. It would be a great idea to do the same with DBD as it has to be one of the most toxic communities out there now.
Making it so easy to find and contact someone could be part of the overall problem.
-
Agreed its a secret afterall and since there are so little secret offerings it's not hard to work out what one is used right now.
-
It sort of goes against the prospect of prolonging a match with another objective as that gives her even more time.
You also have to think about SWF as they would be that much stronger in that scenario. They can afterall wait to pop any gens until any trap is removed and just 99% them communicating how many boxes they have searched and since she has a finite number it's sort of a bit pointless.
The other thing is EGC was never desinged to kill and why the nerf to traps was done. It's just a way to end the game quicker.
I still think they need to buff her stealth, crouch and ambush more than traps and just sort traps so they help to slow the game down without having to rely on RNG.
I think the EGC does what its designed too well enough and an addon such as this would make killing or dying feel kinda cheap tbh.
-
Team focused gameplay yes
Team game no
It's why it has the tag save others or don't.
The reason being is that the team does not have to survive for you to personally win and if someone dies and you escape do you feel guilty or just glad it wasn't you.
People saving, healing, protecting others is really only done to benefit themselves as it gives them a better chance to get out along with the pip and bloodpoints.
SWF can be seen as different as they can coordinate what is happening, what to use and when.
Overtime your mindset can change and I frequently risk myself for others but that's not due to teamplay but because I chose too as it's fun to try. That is of course as long as the killer didn't camp because if they did I'm not allowing them the chance of another possible kill and rewarding the strat.
-
They are fixing the issue by making it use the overall average of the swf ranks instead of how it is now.
I personally think it should be matched off the best ranked player and not the average of them all.
-
The last two years they have done one in September so its worth keeping an eye out around that time as its the most probable but not guaranteed.
-
@Carpemortum said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/581764#Comment_581764
Wait, does that mean my Kates Summer BBQ shirt wont be exclusive soon? Are they gonna sell all the old ######### too???
I wouldnt put it past them in all honesty but I think the saving grace for that shirt is they couldnt really charge $10 for it as thats a complete outfit price.
-
No what should happen if the killer downs players to quickly and easily is they should be ranked away from them as they are obviously the better player. The PIP system and matchmaking are the issue here and that is what needs fixed.
I dont want the devs to reward less skilled players as it will also buff the best survivor players.
-
While exclusives are nice I dont see the harm in them selling them for $10 as some may not have been able to play in the event due to other commitments.
$10 dollars just gives those with disposable income a way to get an item and keeps the money coming in to pay off the DBD debt and keep the game being worked on so why not? cosmetics afterall are nothing in a game its just a different look. Take any past event skins and really apart from the hallow blight killer ones due to them looking amazing and maybe the Feng dress how often do you honestly see people wearing the others?
The devs have already said they dont want to do anymore exclusives skins and anything and everything will be on the market place in some shape or form. Quite frankly it makes no difference to me as I played events for the extra bloodpoints mostly and the skins are just an added bonus and something else to grind while I am playing.
-
@ReikoMori said:
This thread just creates a perfect snapshot of the kind of community we've got in DBD. It's full of people who support bad behavior by having a lasse faire attitude about people voicing opinions said behavior. It isn't all the players' fault they act this way though. Lax rules, community figureheads known for promoting bad behavior, and lack of proper oversight has made it this way.
To speak directly to the stream sniping issue, it should be bannable. First off, in many cases it is quite easy to prove for this game. Most of the stream snipers are also streamers who've built audiences off purposely sniping bigger players. A few fog whispers have archived streams where they've actively been contacted by their sniper. On the other side you have situations that Tru3talent experiences. He's got two players that constantly show up to snipe him. Like it has become nearly an everyday occurrence that the same two man SWF will show up in his game having everything necessary to counter whatever killer and build he is doing. Keep in mind he's been doing subscriber builds sent to him in real time. So there isn't a pooled list he's just left up somewhere.
That constant day to day sniping should be bannable under harassment. Like the guys he's dealing with aren't exactly upstanding gamers. They've got previous VAC bans on their accounts and talk about sniping people on their profiles. If you get sniped once or twice by seeming different people that's where it is hard to prove. You have to just sort of accept that every now and then it will happen. When it gets to be a constant every day thing and you can clearly keep track of a steam profile and document it day after day after day that should get you banned.
While players that grief should be dealt with you are putting the whole responsibility onto the players where there are tools to combat the problem that some streamers refuse to use.
Then there is the amount of reports which could be filled clogging up the system even more as they need to watch whole videos on the problem.
While tru3 may be doing certain community perks there is nothing to say he has to show them on screen before the game it could be sent to him by his mods in private then announce it in chat once the game has started. If he is being griefed in game constantly as they know who he is well that's not something easy to sort as you can check steam for who you get going agaisnt so you should also message them about the problem.
While this whole scenario is scummy it's not the devs problem and again this whole argument should be directed at Twitch themselves not the devs of any game or steam imo as it is Twitch who do not allow those streamers to ban players from viewing them at all.
The devs don't ban for sniping that is all anyone needs to know. There is no need to be rude to the devs when any anger or discussion should really be directed towards the root of the issue which is the streaming platform in this case Twitch.
You should never expect any game dev to pay for extra resources to go through more reports to combat a problem so easily fixed by the actual platform for every single game with a simple click on the name and ban from viewing option.
-
It has a few purposes.
It allows people to play other killers/survivors without feeling the need to only usr them they have full perk loadouts with.
It gives a monthly goal to those who care about rank which can make the grind seem less. Its a way to sort of trick peoples mind.
It allows players to feel more powerful and leave the forums for a bit giving mods some breathing space when going up against newer players until they get to the rank they should be at. Then they can come to the forums to complain again.
-
@Jdsgames said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/581308#Comment_581308
@Peanits I did like the suggestion above to just hide the names. As a killer you can't go to the twitch stream till after the game. As a survivor sniping you can't tell who the killer is by looking at someone's stream unless you are in a swf and all the outfits match. Which even then is not always gonna be accurate. I would also BAN the use of MLGA it simply is being used to block certain players or figure out your killer. It is no longer used for "I need a ping meter"
Hiding names is the most obvious solution and one which should be implemented they could even have random name or number generation in game so players know who they have hooked etc.
At the end of the day stream sniping should not be in the hands of game devs but twitch themselves. Twitch can and should allow streamers to ban people from viewing their stream but as of now they can only stop them chatting. The debate and anger from some posters should really be directed towards Twitch and not any game devs.
As for MLGA they can't ban for it as it does not interfere with the game files. It's a simple java ping tool which has some extra features added. The same can be done with Windows task manager and notepad it just takes more effort.
MLGA soon won't work anyway to block people when dedicated servers are Implemented.
-
It's almost impossible to prove as others have already said.
If you have a problem with stream snipers then take it up with twitch and not the game creators as twitch are the ones who allow you to ban someone from your chat but not from watching you. Twitch will ban snipers I believe but again it's extremely hard to prove.
The games that do it well I have only heard of a couple of cases and those were with huge streamers. The small streamers well I would guess they may not get the same response from a sniping report.
-
It doesn't take many to move over to create a large imbalance.
20k players so you need 4k killer and 16k survivor.
If as little as 200 survivors move over to play killer that means you need 1000 more survivors. 800 to match with them and 200 to make up for those who switched over. Thats 5% of the playerbase due to a small amount moving over.
There isn't a quick fix for someone switching roles as it may be due to a multitude of reasons. Maybe its the gameplay, grind, too easy or hard for them, boredom of that role etc.
-
It never was new play friendly but with each dlc the grind must look more and more daunting to them.
The problem is you don't get much chance to play around with many chars once you realise what the grind is all about and you end up making one on either side to play and level up others until you get the perks you want on them.
While I like grinding and levelling up chars and I simply play for fun that is not the case for everyone especially when some perks are deemed needed by a lot of players to be competative in a match.
The grind does need looked at as it hasn't changed for a very long time. When you can have 2k hours played and not have everything maxed out that is a major issue imo.
-
The thing is DBD is a game where you need to put in the hours you said it yourself.
To say someone who is a hard core daily player should be able to be beaten by a casual player really shows what the thread is about and it's all you really needed to say.
How it reads is you want to be just as good if not better than the others without putting in the same effort.