Fibijean
Fibijean
About
- Username
- Fibijean
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@SleepyWillo @TheRockstarKnight Sorry for the necro, haven't been on here in a while and literally just found this thread. I just wanted to say I was really touched by the well wishes, so thank you ❤️ For the record, I am still perfectly safe and well, just not super active in the dbd community anymore 🙂
-
As long as it's within the established (read: written) rules of the game, and provides some type of strategic advantage to the person doing it, anything is fair play. That's not just my opinion, it's also more or less what the official line on the matter boils down to.
How about instead of requiring other people (or devs) to justify their playstyles to you, you give us an 'objective' reason why you feel qualified to pass moral judgement on others for playing a game the way they want to instead of the way you want them to?
-
@OniWantsYourMacaroni said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1890749#Comment_1890749
Regarding optimization:
They handled it the worst possible way.
They promised us 60 FPS towards the end of 2019.
And nothing improved since then.We still have to deal with unstable FPS and those horrible FPS drops (getting hit with noed/sloppy butcher/freddy,getting bloodlust etc.)That is an extremely important issue that heavily impacts gameplay experience for console/lower end pc players.
And we don't even get any kind of info from them.
The last thing we heard from optimization was when i was asking them in the last Q&A if they could ever fix the FPS drops.And their response was very lackluster (33:33)
(BTW the FPS drop when looting a chest wasn't fixed)
Dealing with this is not fun:
Like,it's been over a year since they promised us 60 and absolutely nothing got done.
They shouldn't have raised expectations so high and then just drop it.It's their fault and it's one of the reasons why i completely lost any respect for BHVR.
Exactly. I'm not saying it was the community's fault, I'm saying the devs slipped up bigtime there and that's exactly why they're so cautious about making any kind of promises, or anything that could be construed as a promise, now.
-
@OniWantsYourMacaroni said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1890537#Comment_1890537
I would agree it's better to be a bit more hesitant when talking about certain things.
However,there are other topic that need more and clear communication.Topics like accessibility options and optimization comes to my mind.
Like I said, as a player I totally agree. But the last time they were transparent about their intentions regarding optimisation, it caused one of the biggest "devs are liars" blowups in the game's history because they were unable to turn their hopes into reality within the projected timeframe - and, to my knowledge, still haven't succeeded in that particular instance.
So I guess what I'm saying is I can see both sides. Particularly when it comes to things like accessibility options, I totally agree it would have been nice to hear something about it sooner - if not an explicit "we're working on it", then at least some more concrete assurance that they were taking it seriously and doing everything they could to find ways to make it happen. If they had done that, perhaps this whole incident with Almo could have been avoided, who knows. I've never been a Community Manager, and I've heard it's a lot harder than it looks, so I personally feel it would be presumptuous for me to tell them how to do their job. But at the same time, I can understand how situations like the one I mentioned above would make them hesitant to be transparent in their communication on any changes, just to be really safe. Not saying I think that's the right decision, just that I have some sympathy for it because I can see what led them to that conclusion.
-
As a player, obviously I wish we knew more about what goes on behind the scenes.
But I've witnessed them do exactly that in the past, and I've seen the fallout. If they announce that they're working on something before they're ready to release it (even if they don't announce a release date and/or are very clear about the fact that it might not happen or might be delayed), one of two things happens: it turns out they can't do the thing, or the thing is going to take longer than expected, and they get accused of breaking promises and lying to their players.
Or, second possibility, they can do the thing, and they do, but it's not in the next patch because nothing is ever released six weeks after they start working on it (which, as I understand from close friends and family who are software engineers, is not that unreasonable, but simply how pipelines work in large companies). Players who don't understand that get upset and, at best, start heckling the devs for being too slow, and at worst, assume they're lying or breaking promises as above.
So do I wish they were less secretive? Sure, that would be nice for me. But when I think about past PR disasters that have come about as a result of them being more transparent, I don't feel like I can really blame them for choosing to just keep their heads down and communicate only when they're 100% sure about something. I would probably do the same in their position.
-
I think if every game were a 2K, that would be indicative of a different problem (lack of variety, perhaps), because games where no one ever wins and it's always a stalemate aren't that fun. The devs don't want every game to be a 2K, they want a 2K average. That means roughly as many 0Ks as 4Ks, roughly as many 1Ks as 3Ks, etc. In other words, they don't want games to be tied all the time, they want the killer to come out on top in roughly half the games that get played, and the survivors to come out on top the other half, with some even matches in there as well.
If they did ever achieve that, then yes, at that point they would probably consider the game "balanced", but there are so very many things that factor into that that realistically, it's probably never going to happen.
-
@Deadeye said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1860954#Comment_1860954
Well, faith in humanity is probably the wrong approach XD sad but true. Especially when it comes to the unfiltered opinions that everyone is able to spread on the internet. :(
I'll come back to this thread when I fully read your linked article, because I already have mostly negative feedback about the dev notes. And I'll also delay my feedback thread to the point where I read that article. Let's see how many points I'll change after reading it :)
Glad to hear you're giving it a go at least 🙂 Thanks for being so fair-minded.
@The_Bootie_Gorgon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1860954#Comment_1860954
We are an emotional bunch though fibi...
"Emotional" is a charitable word for it, I would say. But you're not wrong.
@ggallinftw said:
Gotta understand that a lot of veteran players have nothing but frustration after watching the devs ruin their experience bit by bit over a LONG stretch of time. Trashing the devs is all they have left.
I do understand that. I'm a veteran player myself (playing since about September 2016), just one who likes to give other people the benefit of the doubt and seemingly values compassion and self-control more than the average veteran on the internet. That doesn't mean I'm a pushover or that I don't have strong opinions about things that go on in the game, it just means I treat people like people no matter what they do, and I know how to express my opinions in constructive and respectful ways (which is, in fact, the best way to get them heard). Because at the end of the day, seeing necessary changes happen or understanding why they're not happening is more important to me than indulging my childish impulse to scream abuse at (or about) someone until they give me what I want.
@Xyvielia said:
Thanks for posting this... and for posting, in general.
Your contributions to the forum are always worth the time and effort, even when the members here respond in ignorance.
The article is exactly the practice players need to achieve the reality they desire. Unfortunately, the only ones who will benefit are those who take the time to read and follow through with the better approach to healthy, communicatory relationship with the developers. Hopefully that number increases.
Grace and Understanding go a very long way on the path to success.
Always pleasant additions to the discussion from you😌
Thank you, I appreciate it ❤️ Nice to hear that someone out there sees it the same way, at least!
-
I actually agree with you. Franklin's has been my most disliked perk basically since release because it just seemed like such a jerk move, but I put up with it because that was just my subjective opinion and it didn't mean the perk needed to be changed. Since the rework, though, I do have some serious issues with it.
I don't think it should have the power to erase survivors' items permanently, and the reason I think that is because it feels terrible for the survivor and provides no additional strategic advantage to the killer. Chances are this killer isn't going to go against the same survivors match after match, so it doesn't actually matter to them whether that survivor can use their item in the next match or not. All that should matter to them, the reason to bring Franklin's in the first place, is that the survivor be unable to use their item in this match. And that can be accomplished with a simple buff to old Franklin's without having to delete the item entirely. Either have the drop break the item completely, rendering it unusable, or have its charges drain over time the longer it stays on the ground, but it can still be picked up when it reaches zero. That way, everyone is happy - the killer has mitigated whatever threat the item posed, and the survivor still has the opportunity to salvage the item and use it again in another match if they manage to escape with it.
-
@Mooks said:
Interesting read, you would think most of it would already be common sense but it surely is not (evidenced by some answers right in this topic lol). But there is also stuff in there I didn’t think about. Eg often I try to give solutions for problems instead of addressing the problems itself or why I think the current state may be problematic..
That part was really interesting to me too, but it does make sense. Usually the developers have a much better sense of the bigger picture, what can be done, where and when, and the most valuable thing we can give them is experiential feedback because that's the one thing they can't get just from looking at the theory behind everything. (They're also professionals who've studied this stuff in a way most players probably haven't - not saying that means they're always right, just that I think it's very arrogant for players to assume that we have all the answers and the devs are just too stupid to realise.)
I have to say though, I am kinda disappointed with a lot of the responses to this thread. Probably I shouldn't be surprised, but I did have a little more faith in humanity than this and was really hoping that people would be open-minded enough to think critically about the points made in the article, particularly around the things players don't know about what goes on behind the scenes and why developers "don't listen". Instead, the majority seem to have just gone with the standard "game is trash and devs don't care and won't listen to feedback because they're bad at their jobs". Maybe that's true, of course, but I was hoping people might be able to put their prejudice aside long enough to entertain even the possibility that there's more to it than that.
-
@chieften333 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1852233#Comment_1852233
Yep, she is, but apparently they know enough from the community not to buff her.
Just wish they would consider other aspects beyond what "the stats" tell them.
Doesn't the first line of your comment literally prove that they do take factors other than stats into account?
-
My understanding is that they have discussed DS internally and have just never been able to agree on a viable solution which doesn't come with its own set of issues. Basically, if they're going to rework a perk like DS, they want it to have fewer problems, not just different ones, and most if not all of the popular solutions proposed so far still have holes in them somewhere.
-
@Lazerboy88 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/900387#Comment_900387
I mean, isnt halo rated M? I’m all against fortnite crossover but technically they already have a halo crossover with fortnite which halo is a rated M game
Sure, but as far as content that's appropriate for 13-year-olds goes there's a big difference between a 16+ game and an 18+ game. And content/atmosphere is the most important part, not the number itself (see my other comment in this thread about DBD and Borderlands 3). Halo is not a horror game filled with graphic torture, it's an action FPS with a lot less blood and guts than many games in that genre. Unlike DBD, the focus is not placed on the blood and pain but on the action. The targets in Halo are also typically either monsters or other soldiers, not helpless murder victims like in DBD. Basically, the age rating doesn't matter as much in this case as the atmosphere of the game and the context in which the violent acts are performed.
-
@Aneurysm said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1818479#Comment_1818479
It was yeah dw, sorry I thought it would be clearer addressed at a dev 😅
No worries! Yeah one would hope, but there are a lot of people who go out of their way to be unpleasant when addressing devs so sadly it's not a given.
-
I don't care about the sweaters - they're basically just a login reward with extra steps. Codes that work for an unlimited number of people but only for a limited time are, I think, the best way to go about distributing those kinds of exclusives if that's what they want to do, and I wish that were how the Dwightcrows and Fruitcakes worked as well. But the way those were distributed was awful and frankly I hope they never do it that way again. I don't personally know a single person who liked it aside from the streamers involved.
-
I hope that's a joke.
In case it wasn't - you can't get banned for camping, so reporting it is a waste of time for everyone involved.
-
I suspect you've never worked for a large software development company, because the answer to most of those questions has to do with the structure of the pipeline. Certain things get priority over others because that's what the directors decide should happen. Things get broken or not tested properly because often shortcuts have to be taken when you're on a tight deadline.
If it's true that this happens more with Dead by Daylight than other games, perhaps it's because the game industry in general has a reputation for treating its workers appallingly (look up "crunch culture" if you don't know what I'm talking about) and BHVR is reputed to be one of the few companies that goes out of its way not to do that. They don't force their employees to work 100-hour weeks for no additional pay just to meet release deadlines, but the deadlines still exist, so sometimes balls get dropped.
Should they perhaps extend those deadlines instead, maybe release three chapters a year instead of four? Should they skip a chapter to fix bugs instead? Should they restructure their priorities so certain issues get more attention? Possibly, but none of those are things that individual designers or programmers get a say in. All they can do is their best with the time they're given.
-
Totally agree with you. The fact that the charms were difficult for console players to get was only a small part of the problem. The other issues you mentioned, namely the fact that it was not fun, it was stressful and discouraging the whole way through for the majority of players, that it rewards fast typists over dedicated or skillful players, not to mention the fact that it was exclusionary not only to console players but to those with disabilities as well, have not been addressed at all.
I'm really surprised that they did this again with how few people actually responded positively to the whole DwightCrow debacle. Yes, plenty of people were happy when they got the charm, but it was relief, not enjoyment - the kind of happiness you feel when you get a huge project done before the deadline. Just because you're happy you did it, that doesn't mean you had fun or that you'd want to do it again.
-
@DjShIzz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1724996#Comment_1724996
So they got a key with an add on that can detect black locks? And open them on last two gens?
There are no add-ons for keys that can "detect" the hatch, but if it was right next to the hook, it's very likely that they simply noticed it just like you did. Dull keys and skeleton keys can open the hatch as long as it is visible on the map, which it would be with two survivors and two generators remaining. On top of that, TAG is right, the scoring screen doesn't show items picked up in the trial, only those brought into it. So what probably happened was one of them found a key in a chest during the match, they both noticed it when they were at the hook and were therefore in a position to escape through it immediately afterwards.
-
@LuffyBlack said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1703532#Comment_1703532
I mean...
Seeing as though the event is hidden behind Rift, which is essentially a battle pass I'd say it is in topic.
But I'll be more specific. Do you think the reactions to the event are unfair? Asking in good faith because I'm insanely curious about your input. I know of you from lurking the forums.
I just meant it didn't have much to do with my comment, not that it was off-topic for the thread 🙂
But sure, happy to give my input. Don't want to derail the thread though, so if you want to discuss it further probably best to post on my wall.
While I don't believe abuse is necessary in any context and therefore don't condone the way some people are conveying their displeasure, I don't think the player response on an emotional level is unfair or unwarranted.
That said, I don't think the event's integration into the Rift or Tome challenges is the issue. They did that last year and it was fine (albeit a little disappointing in comparison to the 2018 event). The problems this year, in my opinion, are (1) the lack of meaningful free content (i.e. grindable skins), though this has been recently amended somewhat; (2) The Dwight Crow nonsense (pretty much everything about it except for the charm itself - the hypocrisy around the exclusivity, the way it rewards the fastest typists in the community rather than the most dedicated or enthusiastic players and excludes console players or those with disabilities or bad internet or no Twitch access, how generally demoralising it is for the majority of people, etc); and (3) The fact that there isn't much else to the event aside from bloodpoints and charms to make up for how much those first two things suck.
I should also say that, having taken the trouble to gain more insight into the perspective of game developers in general than probably the average gamer has, I believe there is a pipeline-related explanation for why things went the way they did with this event, and I don't think that the devs are unintelligent or deluded enough to think that this event is on par with others they've released in the past, or to not have foreseen at least some of the backlash from the community. BUT I don't think that's at all obvious, on this occasion, to the community, because without having any insight into the devs' side of things, it really does come across greedy and out-of-touch even to people like myself who have historically been fairly optimistic and gracious about giving the devs the benefit of the doubt. So given that, I do think the expectations players had of the devs in this case were reasonable, and therefore the backlash resulting from those expectations being disappointed is entirely justified, even if I don't agree with how some people are going about it.
-
@Flawless_ said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1703451#Comment_1703451
Bruh BHVR is racking up literally millions they don't need you to save them and there's no injustice in people asking for the devs to get their sh!t together trust me.
Thanks for proving my point. Rather presumptuous of you to assume I was defending BHVR as a company or that player criticism was the injustice I was referring to, don't you think? Especially since you're wrong on both counts.
-
@LuffyBlack said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1703451#Comment_1703451
Do you think the criticisms against Behavior's live service model is unfair and unfounded? If so, why not?
That's a pretty off-topic question for my comment, but I'm happy to answer it if you can be more specific about what you mean.
-
@Komodo16 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1703233#Comment_1703233
I find it funny we call people apologists and white knights for defending people. Hmm I guess cops are white knights and military they defend people who dont stick up for themselves. Oh and those nice kids who stick up for the kids gettinf bullied. Because everything is a white knight in that sense
I've been called a simp and a white knight for defending someone from demonstrably untrue accusations when they weren't there to defend themselves. It seems many people can't tell the difference between swooping in to save someone who doesn't need saving (what a white knight actually is) and standing up against genuine injustice.
-
@anarchy753 said:
Yep, and great fun, been watching 3 streamers for 2 hours straight, and there's been one giveaway so far, all to their subs only.
Subs only? So you literally have to pay to even have a chance at getting charms? What the hell...
Also what happened to "we've decided we don't want exclusives in our game anymore"? :/
-
@indieeden7 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1697525#Comment_1697525
Yep, Dwightcrow and Trap O Lantern (I think) are both limited
Wow. That would suck at the best of times, but when the event content is this sparse... I'm struggling to figure out why anyone thought this was a good idea honestly.
-
Wait, the charms are limited?
-
@ThePolice said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1695205#Comment_1695205
Of course we're entitled, we paid for the game
So we're entitled to what we paid for. We're not entitled to rewards from the developers to prove how grateful they are for a successful transaction, the way OP is implying.
For the record, not saying that the developers shouldn't be grateful, or that it isn't in their best interests to make players feel appreciated. What I'm saying is that it isn't our right to expect such things just because we bought something from them.
-
You knew when you invested that time and money into getting the skin from the Rift that it would become available in the Store eventually. If the Rift cosmetics had originally been marketed as exclusive to that event with no mention of future availability, then I could understand feeling betrayed, because you would have essentially invested in them on false pretenses. But while that has been a valid concern in some past situations (won't derail the thread by doing too far down that rabbit hole), I don't think it applies in this case.
-
I got the impression Garfield would be the survivor if anything... killer Mondays was mentioned on the stream.
-
Points 1, 2, 5 and 6 are correct. Points 3 and 7 are partially correct.
There will be a new cosmetic for David on the paid track of the Rift, but they confirmed that there will also be other blighted cosmetics available that haven't been revealed yet. I'm not sure why you would assume that auric cells will be the primary or only method for obtaining the event cosmetics, unless I misinterpreted what you said. There's certainly no precedent for it - every other Halloween event so far has offered a means by which to get at least one or two event outfits for free.
Also, there is no new flashlight, just the normal Halloween one and the medkit, but there will be new event add-ons for medkits and flashlights. The "Broken Bulb" they showed on stream was just an example of one of those.
-
@rororoxor said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1673601#Comment_1673601
Hey, will we be able to view our MMR in any way once it comes out? I hear this feature was not enabled because people would find out a way to abuse it, but i think it'd work if you made it update after a certain number of matches, like 10 or something. It's just that skilled players who are working to improve their MMR won't really know how well they're doing and it'll feel less rewarding.
One of the reasons MMR is hidden is because it's just there to ensure fair matchmaking. It's not meant to be a goal to aim for - that's what ranks are for, and we've received hints that they're planning to expand on the ranking system after MMR is properly implemented.
-
@kate_best_girl said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1668075#Comment_1668075
So you think its more stereotyping than anything?
Not exactly. I think a foreign language and less-than-perfect English grammar is likely to put native English speakers off regardless of what the language is, but I think it's more likely to be a dealbreaker for a Chinese developer because Chinese media and pop culture isn't typically as popular or admired in the west as, say, Japanese or Korean.
-
Not to get political about it, but overtly Chinese games aren't often that popular with (non-Chinese) Western audiences. If it's simply got a Chinese developer and a great English port, people typically won't notice or care, but if they can't read any of the text in the top video when they go to the store page on Steam, and the English in the description flows badly and isn't even grammatically correct, that's going to be a huge turn-off for a lot of people regardless of the gameplay quality. It's not exclusively a Chinese issue, of course, but there are a few reasons why Chinese games tend to stand out in this way, at least in my experience (Japanese games, for example, are more likely to be received favourably even if they suffer from exactly the same issues, because they have a reputation for quality thanks to huge companies like Nintento).
-
They have said in the past that they're working on reducing the grind. Contrary to what is apparently popular belief, judging from the comments above, they actually are aware it's a problem and do want to do something about it. They just can't do everything at once.
-
@MegHasCuteFeet said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1643975#Comment_1643975
you are getting paid for this man....
come on, disappointing
Just for the record, he isn't getting paid for this. He chooses to be on here in his free time. It's no more a part of his job to be interacting on the forums than it is yours or mine.
-
@Elena said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1630531#Comment_1630531
They did confirm it in the last Q&A stream.
I think they said something along the lines of 'Huntress is one of two killers to get an add-on pass'. @Fibijean greatly pointed out that Myers doesn't have the standard add-ons like the majority of killers do.
To be perfectly clear, though, that was just my speculation. It makes sense, so it's likely Myers (along with Huntress) will be getting an add-on pass, but the devs didn't explicitly mention him by name on the stream, they just said Huntress and one other person, so technically it's not officially confirmed.
-
@Iceyrawr said:
Thank you for this, really.
Since the live stream is in English with no translation,
it require volunteer to translate everything in order for foreign people to understand,
and I'm one of those volunteer for Traditional Chinese, helping people from Taiwan and Hong Kong to understand the Q&A.
I just want to say thank you for making my translation process easier,
compared to going back and forth listening to the live stream, translation off a script is so much easier.
https://forum.gamer.com.tw/C.php?bsn=29919&snA=7413&tnum=5
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/NW16IGRD18TC/screenshot-281603-29.png
My pleasure! I'm very glad it's made things so much easier for you and the non-English community of Dead by Daylight. Helping out people who have difficulty with the language, especially spoken English with different accents, is one of the main reasons I do it 😊
-
@Volfawott said:
My friend how are you not Trusted
I used to be, that's as much as I can say here. But I appreciate the sentiment 😊
-
@TAG said:
The Huntress is one of two remaining killers who still require this treatment
Who's the other, out of curioisity?
They didn't say on the stream, but my guess would be Myers - he has 3/6/5/4/2 of common, uncommon, rare, very rare and ultra rare add-ons respectively, instead of the standard 4/5/5/4/2.
-
@DWolfAlpha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1615045#Comment_1615045
Really? I thought they reinstated the mmr when cross play dropped.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1615063#Comment_1615063
If it is using the old match making right now, about a year ago, they made it so swf matches based on the highest ranking player
As far as I know, it's still disabled. That seemed to be what they were saying on the stream yesterday, anyway.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1615045#Comment_1615045
Thanks mate. I tried peak times and I didn't see a difference.
The paranoid in me wonders if it's high level players queuing with a low level player/new account to roflstomp newbies - and I wish I was crazy here, but there is usually a pattern. 2-3 very high level accounts and one lower.
Yeah, hope the matchmaking or what have you gets fixed soon, because ...I really want to like this game.
Yeah, that is another issue admittedly. I believe parties like that are matched based on the average of all ranks in the party - if it's two or three high-ranked players with one very low rank, the average is probably around purple ranks (5-8) which is very much within the acceptable matchmaking range for you at rank 12. The current system has a lot of things wrong with it, and that's just one of them. Like I said, all you can really do is tough it out until the new matchmaking system comes into play. In the meantime, I would recommend maybe looking at some guides or just watching gameplay on Twitch or YouTube to familiarise yourself more quickly with the game so you don't feel so completely lost in those situations. But for what it's worth, you have my sympathy 🙁
-
@DWolfAlpha said:
The match making right now is based on what killer you're playing. Your first few ranks are usually going to be against other low rank players. After that, the mmr should be in place. But if you switch killers, it won't know how good you are with that killer. Play the same killer for awhile and you should start to play against survivors more suited to your skill level with that killer. Unfortunately, that means you'll have a few bad games in the meantime
This isn't true at the moment, because MMR matchmaking is currently disabled. I would guess OP's problem is the opposite - matchmaking has reverted to how it was before the MMR changed (in other words, pretty garbage) and that's why they're having problems.
The good news, @StarLost , is it's not something you've done wrong, the matchmaking is known to be bad at the moment and everybody is experiencing the same thing. The bad news is there's nothing you can do about it except wait until the new MMR matchmaking is reactivated and hopefully things will improve. In the meantime, playing at peak times when there are likely to be more people online in your region could help, as the main reason for the system to be placing you with high ranked players is because there aren't enough survivors at your own rank available.
-
@Azarath said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1611568#Comment_1611568
It's not his job, but by doing so people aren't going to have high expectations of their own issues getting solved if this was the case
As a player myself, I get why people feel that way, but part of the point I'm trying to make is that just because he doesn't reply to posts doesn't mean he doesn't read them. So if people are feeling like a developer not responding to their issues in his free time automatically means that they aren't going to get fixed, perhaps we're the ones who should be tempering our expectations a bit in that regard.
-
@SloppyKnockout said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1611568#Comment_1611568
It wasn't an attack. Was pointing out typical behaviour. There's a difference.
Indeed, there is a difference between pointing out someone's behaviour - which, as I myself pointed out, is typical of every user on this forum, not only the developers - in a mature and constructive way, and what you did. If 'attack' isn't your preferred word, we can use 'mock' or 'insult', it amounts to the same thing. Point is, we both know that if your intention had been to simply "point out typical behaviour" calmly and respectfully the way you're implying, you wouldn't have been tYpInG LiKe tHiS.
-
@SloppyKnockout said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1611427#Comment_1611427
I like how you cherry pick, as usual, posts like that, but ignore the broken update comments.
Guess we shouldn't be surprised.
RuIn Is LeThAL FoR LaTe GaMe
Do you respond to every post you see on the forums? It's not even part of his job to be on here. Maybe try a bit of empathy next time instead of jumping straight into attack mode.
-
@90bubbel said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1330434#Comment_1330434
wait seriously? where? i know im late ok
It's been a while, so I don't remember the context or know where to look to find the exact quote, but I believe it was stated by @Peanits some months ago.
-
I have yet to meet a DBD player who plays SWF because they "need" to, and not just because they enjoy their friends' company while pursuing a shared hobby.
-
Firstly, maybe lay off Aven. You said that you were one of the best Nurses in the game in your title, and also repeated it in your post. That's a very bold claim to make and you deliberately drew attention to it, so it's only natural that people would focus on that. Also, the mistakes you made are very relevant to the discussion of whether or not this game was unwinnable, which is exactly what you asked for our opinions on, so neither pointing that out nor challenging your assertion that you are one of the best Nurse players out there is "toxic". It's just addressing the content of your post the way you invited us to.
Regarding the game itself, 11.5 minutes is not a genrush. That's actually longer than the average game length. And as for meta perks, the only ones I saw in play were Dead Hard, one Borrowed Time, and that one DS that Nea hit you with, which was admittedly unfortunate, but that's hardly being victim to a full roster of meta perks.
Since only Nea used DS, the fact that the other three had it is irrelevant when it comes to analysing your loss in this game. Same goes for the other three Borrowed Times, and possibly the Sprint Burst (although it might have been used at one point and I just missed it). The Borrowed Time you should honestly have expected from a team with 3 Dead Hards and just hooked the rescuer you'd just downed instead of trying to secure both of them - part of being good at this game is anticipating what perks your opponent is likely to be using and playing around that (and that goes for both sides). You also lost pressure at certain points by camping one spot for too long - even if you know there are survivors nearby, if you can't find them right away, you need to leave the area and put some pressure elsewhere, because while you're hanging around looking for the one or two survivors you know are nearby, their friends elsewhere are doing generators uncontested. I also personally think that you slugged too much and lost pressure because of it. I could be wrong, because I have seen slugging done well and maybe things wouldn't have worked out if you hadn't done that, but in my personal opinion, it's overrated as a method of applying pressure and if you had hooked even half the people you slugged early on instead of leaving them to get picked up by their friends, you might have got more kills towards the end.
In short, my opinion is this: you didn't play far better than the survivors did, your skills were roughly on the same level from what I saw in that match, and you also made more mistakes than you seem to think. In the end, the survivors managed to pip you at the post, which could perhaps have avoided if they hadn't used Dead Hard or DS, but could also have been avoided, I think, if you had hooked them more in the early game. What this game proves is that meta perks give you an edge, which everyone already knows, and that Dead Hard is particularly brutal against Nurse. It doesn't prove that they're overpowered or impossible to beat, and, to be blunt, you would probably improve more as a player if you looked back on games like this and analysed your own mistakes more carefully rather than blaming your loss on "meta perks".
-
Of course my opinion is biased, everyone's is. Even this quiz is biased. (For example, I don't think camping is fine and teabagging isn't because I'm killer-biased as the question implies, I think that because one is a strategy and the other is a taunt.)
Being biased isn't a fault, nor is it a sign of close-mindedness. It just means that all your ideas are necessarily skewed by your personal values and experiences. The true test isn't where you're biased, but whether you're humble and self-aware enough to understand that implicit bias is present in every thought and opinion you have and every post or comment you make, and are able to act accordingly.
-
I mean, if I'm six years old, obviously it makes me want to not play basketball ever again. In theory, though, players of an 18+ game should have a bit more resilience and fortitude than a six-year-old.
-
@Roobnus said:
For each match 2 players will increase their rating, 2 players will lose their rating and one players rating will remain unchanged.
The players are choosen totally random and so is the number of the rating increase / loss. This way people can't abuse the system and it won't end in a "play more = higher rating" problem!
Perfect solution from BHVR!
Where are you getting that information from?
(And if you're making it up as a joke, it would be good to clarify that so no one like the OP takes it as a fact by mistake.)