ThePrizz
ThePrizz
About
- Username
- ThePrizz
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3152601#Comment_3152601
What do you mean by this? Someone can't claim something is scary if the majority don't find it scary?
They can, but when people refer to the term "scary" they are referring to the general understanding of the term, not what it could be.
All you people needed to do is say "Trickster could be scary" instead of saying that he is scary, and that would fix everything, but instead, you contradict someone that obviously refers the broad meaning of the term, by saying that exceptions from the broad meaning can be applied too.
-
@Sonzaishinai said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3152112#Comment_3152112
Read the first line again of what i said again
Also i didn't imagine a back story, it is his back story
It's cool that all you need to get horror vibes is "aah spooky scary monster" but some people need a little more nuance then that
Glad that people who do horror don't use your definition cause to me it's quite bland
I guess that if BHVR employs me, and I'll create a killer that's an actual human sized dandelion, I could easily convince you that the dandelion fits the horror theme if I'll add a backstory to it.
You basically appeal authority here. "If BHVR says that it is supposed to be scary, then I'll consider it scary no matter what"
That says quite a lot.
-
@WesCravenFan said:
They took away the fog, took away the darkness, hold back on the violence, and have costumes like the Dwight elf.
Who liked to you and called this a horror game?
BHVR markets this as being a horror game.
I'm not pulling stuff out of my ass. The game was and continues to be marketed as a horror game. My problem is that instead of making things more horrific they stray more and more away from that theme.
-
@Nazzzak said:
It took maybe a month for the horror aspect of the game to wear off when i started playing. They could chuck the scariest, goriest looking figure in there and I wouldn't batter an eyelid.
Why do you people can't seem to understand that something can be horror without being scary.
If you play and finish Dead Space 100 times, it doesn't mean it stops being a horror game after the first time because you know what's about to happen. It just stops being scary to you, but it's still a horror game, the ambiance, the visual and sound cues that make the game horror are still there.
-
@versacefeng said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3152076#Comment_3152076
This. People need to stop saying 'X' isn't scary because they don't look like a stereotypical 70-90s horror movie villain.
And people need to stop saying 'X' is scary because a very small amount of people see something that they consider scary in 'X' that otherwise most people don't consider it to be scary at all.
-
@VikingDragonXii said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3152226#Comment_3152226
So by your logic anyone who doesn't agree with you are wrong and should not have their opinions heard because they are just the minority....got it now this entire post is going into the lines of OP disagreeing with anyone who doesn't share thier opinion on the "generally accepted term"
You are getting involved in an argument about something being horror or not, without having a basic understanding of what horror means, and thinking that exceptions to the general understanding of what it means (like a sailor in Cambodia considering puffer fish to be horror or whatever) invalidate my opinion.
You can disagree with me but that doesn't make your opinion valid in any way unless you have solid arguments.
What you're basically trying to do, is undermine my opinion (That certain things in this game are not considered horror by a vast majority of people), on the pretext that it is subjective, when it's not. It's literally that simple.
You, providing exceptions to what can be considered horror is a bad argument in itself, you don't realize that you're the one being subjective on an objective matter.
You're involuntarily applying a logical fallacy to your argument, which is the relativist fallacy:
"The relativist fallacy arises when we illegitimately argue that nobody is incorrect because what is true for you is false for me, and we are both correct. Relativism is based on the idea that each culture or person creates their own truth, so nobody is objectively incorrect. Many people new drawn to relativism because they think all answers are equally good since so many philosophical questions have no final answer. Well, this is false. Imagine arguing the universe was created by a rabbit because we are not really sure how the universe began. The fact that we do not know (i.e. skepticism) does not mean every opinion is true or strong"
-
@Sava18 said:
I know I'm in the minority here but I want to chase people not spend 5 minutes looking for a survivor. That's would just be boring
Survivors would have a hard time seeing you too, so it should make things more interesting for the killers as well. Especially the ones with smaller models, or the ones that can crouch.
-
Let me add a little bit of philosophy to this.
When you're calling something to be a subjective matter, you'll need at least 2 groups of people disagreeing on the subject. The thing most people miss, is that in order for subjectivity to be a good counter-argument, there shouldn't be a huge majority of people that think a certain way about it and then have a few scattered around groups of people that think otherwise. Cause if this the fact, it means that the people disagreeing with the majority are just exceptions and should be not taken into consideration.
If claim something that is generally accepted to be true, you can't say that I'm subjective, then like as a proof you say that you know someone who is of other opinion than me.
I said that Trickster looks like some korean TikToker with some extra sense of fashion, and that's not scary, and I'm objectively right, as funny as it sounds.
Those are the guys from BTS, they could literally all be alternate skins for Trickster
-
@TheWheelOfCheese said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3152200#Comment_3152200
Ah, so you don't have any data, you're just making assumptions about what others think. Got it.
Yes !
Do I need to create a poll in order to be able to use a word that has basic meaning each time some people don't seem to grasp the concept behind it?
-
You can't expect anything from random people.
Games don't have communities. They used to, and you might say this forum is somewhat of a community. But people in the actual game do not belong in a community, you press a button, encounter some random people that you don't know, and then you probably never see them before.
Insulting someone is like screaming in a well. You don't know the guy that you're insulting, he doesn't know you, in 5 minutes you'll both forget about what it was said.
You can't have a community if you don't encounter the same people on a regular base. That used to happen with certain games that had private servers, but like everything in this life, gets depersonalized.
Instead of being a renown part of a community through how well you play or how you behave, you're just another piece in the cog that is matchmaking.
-
@TheWheelOfCheese said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3152182#Comment_3152182
most people think he's not creepy at all
Interesting, what poll are you getting that data from? I'd be interested to look at the numbers.
Mate, print some pictures with the older killers, then print one with Trickster, and literally go outside, and ask random people if they think any of the characters do not belong in a horror game. You'll see for yourself.
Being here in this echo chamber with people that read lores and then decide if something is scary or not based on them can really change your perspective of reality.
99.9% of the player base doesn't participate in those forum discussions, if you think 5 upvotes on a comment say anything you, might end up fooling yourself
-
@VikingDragonXii said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3152182#Comment_3152182
I no where tried to invalidate what you were saying just pointing out that every response to anyone that didn't share your idea of what Horror should be gets a your wrong response and a insult to back it up.
Also what small minority are you speaking of? Do you have these numbers to show me that this minority exist, or is it you find insulting and trying to prove yourself right while ignoring all other opinions as false what your really after.
What I find really funny is that you totally ignored my response about the Movie industry and how there's a wide variety of "Horror" movies that fit everyones ideas of "Horror".
That's exactly what you don't seem to grasp.
I am not talking about "what I think horror should be". I am talking about what "horror" is generally agreed upon being by most people.
If we would not generally agree upon what things mean, we would not be able to define anything, and communication between two people would not exist above a basic level.
How could you brand a movie as being a Comedy, or Horror, or a Drama, if every single person has a different concept of what those words mean ?
If the world would work as you describe it, we would go at the cinema to see a Horror movie, and we would watch a story about two guys sailing on a boat, because in the director's opinion, huge bodies of water are scary.
The fact that movies have a wide range of motifs proves nothing. As long as they have traits specific to the horror genre. The motif is not important. DbD has a wide range of killers too.
Horror movies that have goofy looking characters as the main thing that's supposed to bring the horror aspect get laughed at. Look at chucky, chucky is basically a meme, it's comedy.
-
@VikingDragonXii said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3152151#Comment_3152151
No one's confusing anything everyone has their own opinions on what Horror is and even the Movie world has a wide range of what Horror is. Thier opinions may differ from yours so there is no right or wrong answer here.
But when people gave their opinions you came back with basically "Your Wrong" response
There's many logical mistakes on what you just said.
First of all, just because everyone CAN have their own opinion on something, doesn't mean that the general consensus over that something changes in any way. It literally means nothing for the sake of the argument.
If everyone would have their own opinion as of what "horror" means, BHVR would not be able to market their game as a "horror" game. But somehow they can, why? Because there's a generally accepted notion about what the term "horror" stands for.
You are trying to invalidate what I say on the pretext that I'm "subjective" when in fact, I'm quite objective, since I appeal to what most people consider horror, when I'm referring to this term.
So yes, I am able to say "You're wrong" because you are. You're appealing to a small minority of people like they were the main consensus.
The fact that a random girl from Korea thinks Trickster is the scariest thing in the universe, doesn't change the fact that most people think he's not creepy at all, and that factually he lacks qualities that are specific to the horror genre.
-
Space one time to snuff.
Space a second time to destroy.
Base kit ! Now !
-
@Whoudini said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/342926/the-horror-aspect-of-the-game-is-important
Go play a different game, no matter what they add if u have 1k+ hours the game is not scary anymore. Whether they add another trickster or a killer who is actually terrifying it wont make a difference. This boils down to I think the Trickster is too colourful, at the end of the day who cares?
Games can ruin their atmosphere through poor decisions when it comes to new additions to the game.
I've quit CSGO for that exact reason when they started adding all kinds of weird operators, and so did many others.
I've quit LoL when they started adding weird skins that made no sense. Like at a point they turned an alien monster into a pug dog. It made me feel like I was playing some strange counterfeit copy of LoL that was hacked by 10 year olds who modded the game with bad skins.
I've quit Warzone when they integrated Cold War into what used to be the Modern Warfare engine. It made the game have 2 versions of the same gun, designed in different ways, with different animations and model quality.
Being horror and being scary are two different things by the way, stop confusing them.
Also marketing a game as horror and then adding new stuff that isn't horror is not so cash money
-
@lauraa said:
Dbd tries torepresent various kinds of horror, not just drug fueled 70s/80s slasher horror.
Trickster isnt scary scary, but he brings a kind of urban/modern style horror niche. He seems likethe kind of dude who would have a Nightclub where people party and have a good time meanwhile behind 1 door theres a soundproof studio where somebody is screaming bloody murder and nobody can hear it.
I like the variety. Sometimes its a miss, but sometimes you get introduced to something neat. I never would have watched Ringu if not for dbd
I mean, at this point, they might as well add Stanley Ipkiss from "The Mask" to the game, and someone would still come up and say stuff like "Well, he has a mask, so he's mysterious, and has some weird psycho niche to him, like he'd kill someone and then dance away from the body"
-
@GentlemanFridge said:
Horror games thrive on the fear of the unknown. That's really what it boils down to. Heading into a pitch-black hallway builds tension, because you don't know if anything is in there. Anything else can be related to phobias or association with one's own experiences.
Being a PvP game, DbD simply cannot be a scary game without making one side objectively overpowered. In order for both parties to stand a solid chance at winning, there must be limits in place. Those limits are well-known to the side that is supposed to be scared, effectively nullifying the scary factor entirely.
What makes an individual person scary is not knowing (but having a vague idea) what lengths they are willing and able to go to to achieve their goals. The imagination then takes care of the rest. The power of suggestion is something not to be underestimated when crafting something scary. Last Year did this remarkably well with some of its environmental kills, but those also wear thin when it happens often and you realise it's just a game mechanic. Likewise, even as an archnophobe, the spider monster hardly scared me after watching a single video about it.
We know full-well what Trapper is like; what he does, how he does it, and how you can to stop it. He is therefore no longer scary, unless you have a phobia of bear traps. When he suddenly starts sprinting at mach 8 because cheater is controlling him, is when he becomes scary. But we all know that that would be broken strong.
It's not necessarily about being scary, being scary is part of what the term "horror" includes, but it doesn't mean that you need to expect a jumpscare. A horror experience is achieved through ambiance mainly and the visuals.
As I said before, look at Dredge, he's perfect for this game. He's keeping survivors on their toes by being able to teleport to lockers, and nightfall is a pretty thrilling mechanic that creates a lot of unease.
-
@Sonzaishinai said:
Horror is subjective
Trickster to me is way scarier then say Demogorgen
Cause a human with a baseball bat and knives is something that can actually hurt you in the real world
a demogorgen can't. Cause it's clearly made up
Also the idea of him putting screams of his victim into a song you're jamming to is disturbing to say the least
What is scary in real life and what is scary in a video game are two different things, that's not a good comparison at all.
Someone shooting a gun at you, will make you shake in fear if it happened in real life, but not in a video game. That's why Counter-Strike is not considered a horror game.
Video games use audio and visual cues in order to achieve what is called a "horror ambiance". The most important visual cue in this game is how the killer looks. Trickster looks like a korean TikToker that went a little over the top with his fashion choices.
If you need to imagine a back story in order for something to be scary, I have some bad news. It's not scary.
By your logic I could imagine that a random rock on a random map was used for a human sacrifice ritual, thus making it scary lol
-
Ok, so I wasn't aware of this, thus I watched some old gameplay :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUWWu8AIWtYI'm so mad that I didn't get to play when the game looked like this, what we have now feels like a straight downgrade
-
@SMitchell8 said:
Flashlight Feng's are scarier than Trickster tbf. As for Wiskey, who's that bloke? Is he a survivor?
My own hallucinations when I'm playing Doctor are scarier than Trickster
The dead guy in the Grave of Glenvale's saloon is scarier than Trickster
The police car in Lampkin Lane is more terrifying than Trickster
-
@NomiNomad said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3151882#Comment_3151882
What is 'generally considered' to be or not to be scary doesn't matter.
It really sounds like you want BHVR to add things that you find scary and to never, ever stray from the things you, the great almighty Prizz, find scary. I'm not even sure what you want them to do. What, you want them to add darker maps? More generic slasher killers?
Also, she was from South Korea. The country was literally in the post, how can you mistake it that quickly?
What's generally considered to be horror does matter. Because that's how they promote their game.
Imagine I'd create a game and promote it as a "Comedy Filled Multiplayer Action Game", and it's fun for a while, everybody is having a ball, the characters are funny looking (and it's generally agreed by the player base that they are indeed funny looking). But then I add a character that's simply a tomato, and a lot of players start to frown, like what's the point of having a tomato as a character, it's not funny looking at all ?
But then you come, alongside some of the other people that responded here and go full burst like :
"PRIZZ SOME GUY THAT I KNOW FROM SINGAPORE THINKS THE TOMATO IS THE FUNNIEST CHARACTER IN THE GAME, being funny is subjective, I personally do not consider the tomato to be funny, my friends don't consider the tomato to be funny, BUT THIS GUY FROM SINGAPORE MAN..... if he thinks the tomato is funny, then it's funny man, Prizz man...."
-
@NomiNomad said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3151844#Comment_3151844
You can't talk about horror without subjectivity because horror can be and is a incredibly broad term. Bringing up my intelligence in some useless show of passive agression can't change that.
Horror can be the feeling that something bad is about to happen, sure, but horror can also be a simple state of unease. It can be watching something slowly happen. Horror can literally be anything.
Your definition of horror is not universal, just as Karu said. My definition of horror is entirely different from yours, just as I'm sure everybody discussing on this thread's is. The general consesus has absolutely nothing to do with what people find scary.
Every term has generally accepted meanings. If everyone would use subjective terms for everything in their lives this world would be chaotic and we would not understand each other. Just as we can't understand each other here, because when I use the term "horror" I'm referring to what is socially agreed upon in general, but when you're using the term, you're referring to the exceptions which makes no sense. An asian girl considering Trickster to be the scariest killer is an exception.
And before you tell me that there's no generally accepted meaning for the word horror, explain to me then why Horror theme parks, Horror movies, horrorcore music and all of those things exist ? How could they exist if the term is subjective ? They would not attract so many people since everyone would have a different idea of what horror is.
You just confuse facts with feelings and use exceptions as they were the generally occurring things
-
@AnneBonny said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3151844#Comment_3151844
what is defined as food is much more absolute than what is defined as horror so that's an awful comparison lol. i hate to break it to you but different people consider different things scary, so no, most people don't think the same thing when they think of horror. maybe there are some common aspects or tropes seen in horror media that are well known but what actually scares someone is completely subjective.
It's literally not, vegans might consider animal products not to be food.
Carnivores might consider vegetables and other stuff not to be food.
Just because it's not food for them, doesn't mean it's not food for most of the people.
It's the same here, most people don't consider Trickster to be scary, just because some random lady from Japan thought he's the scariest killer doesn't mean that he's scary.
It feels like to you people, everything that can be, actually is.
A bat can be food, but is generally considered as not to be.
A pen can be a weapon, but it is generally considered not to be.
Trickster can be scary for a lady from Japan, but is generally considered not to be.
-
@NomiNomad said:
Horror is incredibly subjective. It's literally impossible to find something that is universally scary. The same thing can be said about ambience.
Do I find Trickster scary? No, not really. I guarantee somebody does somewhere. The same thing goes for Wesker.
In fact, I don't think any of the current killers are scary, maybe aside from Dredge.
As for the maps, big disagree. Texas Chainsaw Massacre, one of the most prolific horror movies ever made, takes place during the day. Horror doesn't have to happen at night. Basically every single map you listed I would find a far more interesting horror setting then something like, say, the MacMillan Estate.
It's not that hard to understand that in order for something to be horror, it needs to create a sensation that something bad is about to happen soon. And you do that through unpredictability and visual/sound cues. In this game, something bad is the equivalent of being caught by surprise by the killer, or doing something that might get his attention and make him come after you.
Not only that sensation makes the game considered to be "horror", but it also makes it fun.
What's fun in always knowing where the killer is, what he's doing and what's about to happen ? Absolutely nothing. I am pretty sure that most people would find a game in which you just do gens and escape pretty unenjoyable.
Now in order to be able to argue like normal intelligent human beings, we should also stop with this "oh well that it's subjective" argument. Everything in this whole world can be subjective. I might consider foods that contain GMOs not to be foods. The general consensus of what food actually is and what somebody means when he says "food" is well known.
You also know what I mean when I refer to the word "Horror", and most people think about the same thing when they hear the word "Horror", they think about ghosts, jump scares, feelings of unease, eerie places, dangerous situations, the woods during the nigh.
People coming around telling me "B-B-b-but some people consider Stephanie from Lazy Town to be scare". Good for them man, that's not the general consensus
-
Because if you incentivize mixed hooks, the killers can still tunnel.
You're not addressing the issue.
To put it in simple terms for you to understand, it's like your mother giving you a cookie if you promise not to slap your brother.
You promise not to slap your brother, you take the cookie, but now if you really want to, you can still slap your brother.
Your mom is not preventing the issue of you slapping your brother, she just incentivizes you not to do so.
In order to prevent you from slapping your brother she'd have to put you two in different rooms, or to punish you harder for doing that until you realize that it is counter-productive for you to do that.
-
What bugs me the most about them is that sometimes they do things really well and sometimes it feels like they have little to no imagination.
The mid-chapter update was amazing, I see a lot of diversity when it comes to the perks people play which is also pretty nice.
But when you look at the latest 7 killers ( Wesker included ), only Pinhead and Dredge feel unique and polished.
The last 3 maps are also pretty bad. Garden of Joy is sort of meh, but Forsaken Boneyard and RPD are horrible.
They usually don't fix things that are outdated and that everyone pretty much agrees that they suck, like certain addons and older Killers.
It takes waaaay too long for them to come up with impactful updates that improve the quality of life. Look at Dota 2 for example, those guys change up their game constantly, and it's so enjoyable and thrilling, yeah maybe they slip here and there making something a bit overpowered but they fix them pretty fast.
I'm personally only complaining because the game could be 100 times better, it's still enjoyable in it's current state, but there's so so much room for improvement.
-
I have some ideas that could make him an actually cool killer, hear me out:
Deathslinger gets a new passive abilty, walking around the map causes the passive to charge up, when it is fully charged and you stop walking, an audio cue like the wild west cowboy fights starts playing, it lasts 5 seconds. After 1 second, every survivor that moves or performs any other action has it's aura highlighted to you until the audio stops playing.
Now that's what I call entertaining gameplay and character immersion. It will really make you feel like a cowboy scouting the area, and that will put survivors in panic mode as they will need to freeze in place.
Or they could just make something like this :
- Whenever you're pulling a survivor and there's a pallet directly between you and him, you will get a very hard skill check. Hitting that skill check will break the pallet and the chain.
-
It seems like people don't understand what allows camping and tunneling to still continue to exist.
It's the fact that the killer has the vision to be able to do so.
Create some fairytale narrative that oh, the entity somehow punishes the killer every time an unhook happens, so the killer gets blinded. Increase the duration of the blind depending on how close to the hook the killer is, minimum being 1 second up to like 5 seconds. Make it so that he gets blinded anyways no matter how far he from the hook, but if he's far away he'll only suffer for 1 second. That would definitely make tunneling a challenging task.
Now it won't fix camping since that occurs before the unhook happens obviously. But make it so that if the killer is within x meters of the hook and more than 5 seconds passed since the unhook, he can instantly be blinded by a flashlight when inside the radius.
There, I fixed camping and tunneling in two simple steps. Blind the killer on unhook depending on how close he is to the hook, and have the capacity to instantly blind him with a flashbang inside the hook radius after more than 5 seconds passed since he put a survivor on it (this would prevent survivors trying to insta blind him after the hook occurs).
Although if this gets implemented, the killer should receive some buffs, maybe give him sort of a reverse BBQ and Chili, where he can see the auras of the other 2 survivors for a few seconds after the unhook blind ends..
Imo this should make the gameplay way more thrilling than it is now, it should go like this:
- Killer hooks one guy. Then he needs to get away from the hook in order to better use the reverse BBQ and Chili he'll receive when the unhook happens. If he doesn't, he risks getting blinded either by the entity, if a sneaky unhook happens, or by someone with a flashlight.
- All survivors will be put on their toes now when someone gets hooked. They either need to go for the unhook, or pretty much hide in lockers so they hide their aura when the unhook occurs. Killers won't be able to camp and tunnel anymore but they'll have increased map pressure.
The blind on unhook needs to happen no matter otherwise high mobility killers would just sit at a distance and run back to the hook asap when the unhooking happens.
-
@OrangeBear said:
Because they need to always make 20 add-ons for killers so the bloodweb works as intended. coming up with 20 add-ons for certain killers is very hard because some powers just aren't very customisable.
I mean, people are actually paid in order to come up with ideas and implement them.
I can't imagine paying someone to come up with a bunch of addons like we currently have, I'd fire them instantly to be honest.
I get it that some things could end up being OP but that's why you can tinker with numbers and that's also why you have a PTB, to constantly test stuff.
- For example, Bubba could have addons that decrease the time it takes to rev the chainsaw before going into a sweep. Yes, if it would shave off a lot of out of it it would become op, but numbers like 0.1/0.2/0.3 should be fine I guess.
- He could have an addon that lets you press m2 a second time after the revving meter goes above 70% in order to start the sweep faster but only be able to go for 1 charge. Now maybe it needs to be more than 70% in order for it not to be OP, but it's ok, they can tinker with those numbers. All I'm saying that possibilities exist.
I could come up with plenty other ideas:
- At the end of his tantrum, the closest survivor to Bubba has his aura revealed for 4 seconds.
- During his sweep, all survivors that can hear his chainsaw have a decreased repairing speed.
- While he's out of chainsaw charges, the next m1 hit inflicts deep wound.
- During his tantrum, the closest generator that is being worked on is highlighted to Bubba.
-
@Norhc said:
The chains? None of the chains addons are good, lmao. Also, it's "Beast's" Marks and its "situationality" is barely ever relevant. It always greatly helps in loops which is all that matters.
I mean they always apply a debuff to survivors whenever you hit them, maybe except the one that drops their item in case they have none, but you're getting value on every chainsaw hit
-
@Jeromy137 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3151056#Comment_3151056
Agreed addons should be a boost with some needing downsides depending on how powerful they are majority of addons should not be bad but to many are bad
I believe the Iri addons for the Huntress are the perfect example of how strong addons should be balanced.
Insta down but you'll need to hit that one hatchet or you'll need to reload at a locker.
Move speed boost but only when you're out of your power ? Fair
-
@Jeromy137 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3151051#Comment_3151051
Depends on the killer for the brown addon's some killers actually have some decent brown addon's
But that's the idea, it shouldn't be "some killers" it should be all killers and all addons should be decent.
Why would you even create an addon if it's not decent ? What's the point of it ?
Like what's the point of the grease for Bubba ? It lets you rev the chainsaw more before you'll throw a tantrum. It would be an ok-ish perk if you wouldn't get slowed when you're revving, but currently it is very counter-productive. The only thing this achieves currently is help with camping a little bit, which is not a good thing for the game
-
@Jeromy137 said:
I agree that there are some addon's that need to be removed or reworked but there are addon's that are very powerful that need a slight or major downside to be fair
The artist has some of the worst addon's in the game like she has 3 that show the survivors where your crows are with no benefit to her ability
I agree that are some that are too powerful too.
But that's the thing, the base kit of the Killer should already be strong enough to let you have a decent game, you should not depend on addons. All they have to do is give you small boosts in different areas.
-
@malibu_barbie_26 said:
Why even have brown anything available? I wish I could cash in my unused offerings and items/add-one. And just getting half BP back would give me an easy 2mil blood points.
I mean, I kind of get the idea behind having different quality addons in order to balance out the bloodweb, but even if they're brown, let them give you a little bit of an advantage for god's sake
-
@KerJuice said:
A lot of the add-ons for survivor items are useless too. Like the key add-ons that let you see survivor auras for use of the key’s energy. Or the map marker. Or the pliers that reduce gen repair noise. No one uses those. I don’t ever see them in post game menus. You know why? Useless.
And they need to rework my boy Meyer’s add-ons. I sware to gawd I get more 4K’s with his brown add-ons than his yellow’s and most greens.
Well, I didn't necessarily want to make a point only about killer addons, even though I gave them as an example, but.....
The addons that you mention still can give you value without any real downsides. Seeing the aura of other survivors can definitely help you if you're a solo survivor and run perks that need you to be in the presence of other survivors, and not making any noise when repairing is very good against killers that don't use whispers or have aura reading. Cause for example when I play killer and I'm at the beginning of the game, unless I have whispers, I listen for the gen repairing sound to find survivors, you can also make plays by repairing near the killer during mid/late game, if he doesn't have direct line of sight of you he won't be able to tell if the gen is being worked on unless he waits a little and hears the pistons speeding up or he kicked it beforehand.
You need to think about addons in terms of "Is this gonna give me value if I use it and how often will it do so, also is there a chance that I would do better without this addon in certain situations ?".
Bubba's muffler for example will only trigger if you play bad and hit something other than a survivor with your chainsaw. You can't really predict if you'll get value or not with this, and most of the time if you're playing good you won't get any value out of it. The marks even if you get a move speed boost, can hinder you around windows.
It's very weird when you think around how they are balanced. Wraith has a perk that shows you the auras of survivors around you while invisible, while Bubba has an addon that does the same but you need to rev your chainsaw for it to work. The wraith addon is 10x better.
I'd rather not feel like "oh man I should have picked something else instead" when after choosing certain addons, cause that's why they're there for, to give you a helping hand
-
@DredgeyEdgey said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3150724#Comment_3150724
This sounds like hatch stand off all over again on paper it sounds like a good idea but it will turn into who ever moves first loses
Can you elaborate ? I can't seem to understand what you're trying to say
If the survivor leaves the hook radius and there's no other survivor close to him, he's fine. All he has to do is wait a little bit after he gets unhooked for the other guys to bounce from his proximity, now BT works as usual.
It will only not work if the unhooked survivor leaves the hook radius and is close to another survivor, which will be his fault cause he can just run in another direction.
They could maybe highlight his aura to the other survivors just so they don't make the mistake of bumping into him unintentionally.
-
Don't stress too much, I had it 2 times, my parents had it too.
It's gonna be fine
-
BT should last only when you're like 3 m around the hook and then it should get removed in case you stick around another survivor.
That's the point of it, to prevent tunneling, if you run around another survivor you're intentionally making yourself tunnelable.
If you lose the BT after you leave the hook radius and you're around another survivor, that would help with the free end game escape too.
Now it will make it more challenging if you want to escape in the end game.
Let's say all gens are done, and you're on the hook, if someone comes and unhooks you, you kind of need to wait a bit for them to run away, otherwise your BT will get removed once you leave the hook radius, cause you'll be in close proximity of the other player. This will make it still possible to escape end game, but it will be more challenging.
-
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3149806#Comment_3149806
Balance≈fun
Fun≠balance
What's so hard to understand?
Your logic is so flawed, mind-boggling actually.
You don't seem to understand what balance means. When a game is close to being balanced, both sides have fun, cause there's no particular side having a huge advantage over the other.
In games in which this is not the case, the side that is at a disadvantage, usually has a lot more to gain if it wins the game in the end cause they are fighting the odds, but that definitely doesn't happen in DBD, so there is no reason there not be a balance.
Now you also don't seem to really grasp what people refer to when they talk about fun. It doesn't mean the game is fun when only one person enjoys the experience. A game is fun when all players can have a good experience during a match. Strong accent on the word CAN, since sometimes it doesn't happen, but if you take into account a larger number of games it has happen more times than not in order for a game to be called fun.
-
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3149780#Comment_3149780
You lost me when you mentioned fun.
Fun is irrelevant to game balance
WHAT ?
People are literally playing this game to have fun, the more fun people can have, the more the game grows, as more people will want to start playing it.
Balance the game in a way that makes it less and less fun and you're gonna start losing players.
Why would anyone balance their game in a way to make it less fun, that sounds so counter-productive.
Mind blowing that don't see the correlation between those two
-
In order to have fun as a survivor you need to be at least threatened by the killer, otherwise you'll just fight the AI that gives you the skill checks.
Imagine spawning into a game and some kind of bug happens and there's no killer, you just have to do the gens and escape. That would be probably the most boring experience possible in this game as a survivor right ?
Well now that is what pretty much happens when a killer tunnels one player. The other 3 survivors are in a way, playing a separate game in which there is no killer. How is that even allowed to happen ? It pretty much feels like an exploit lmao.
-
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3149755#Comment_3149755
I don't want to delete playstyles, simple as lol. You sound like the kind of person to think old 16 second heals CoH was fine
It's a problematic play style that can pretty much ruin the fun for one of the players in a match, and by extension to the other survivors that remain in a 3v1.
I'm a killer main and I still understand how dumb being able to quickly all-in one guy out of the game is.
I wouldn't even call it a play style, it's just abuse of power, because the game lets one guy decide to cancel out the whole experience for the other players. That's exactly how it is.
If I'm a killer, I can just decide to tunnel you, thus I randomly decide to ruin the fun for the whole lobby basically. It's pretty much the equivalent of going afk. The guy getting tunneled has no fun, the other 3 guys have no fun because they either do the gens and escape without any sort of interaction with the killer or they end up 3v1.
-
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3149696#Comment_3149696
If you thought about it, you'd realize I don't want the base-kit DS, nor the DS Perk, to let the Survivor walk free with no counterplay after getting tunneled.
You could just use a Flashlight and blind the Killer after stunning them if you want free escapes after getting tunneled
So just say that you don't want tunneling to stop then lol.
Not being able to tunnel literally means that you should not be able to do anything to the survivor that got unhooked for some time, unless he performs a conspicuous action or he tries to body block.
-
@neb said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3149558#Comment_3149558
god im just imagining the body blocking survivors blocking a doorway or gap so I can't walk through to chase the unhooker, and I get blinded after hitting them, losing the two people.
would possibly throw my monitor out the window
check the post above
-
@RatbasterdJr said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3149652#Comment_3149652
This would be abused. So now the survivor is invincible to being downed, but can force a body block and blind the killer so he can’t chase anybody else? Do you realize how abusable that is?
I literally provided solutions for all your problems on a post in the first page of this thread, but I guess you didn't bother to read.
See? You don't try to find solutions, you try to find problems, without providing any way to fix to them. That's such a negative way to think.
But here it is for you again :
" Give the survivor about a 30 second status effect after he's unhooked that stops when the survivor performs a conspicuous action. This will prevent killers from just waiting out the timer and will give the survivor a lot of time to work with.
That status effect gives the survivor the current BT effect and also blinds the killer in case the killer hits the survivor. In order to stop survivors from trying to tank hits for their teammate with this, make the killer be able to pick up the survivor if he's close to him, sort of like the tombstone range for Myers.
Also in order to prevent killers from abusing this and insta-picking up survivors, the killer is not able to pick up the survivor if he's 3 meters away or more from another survivor. "
To this I would also add that in order for the Killer not to be able to insta-pick up someone as soon as he gets unhooked and abuse this you could disable the pick-up feature in the first 2 seconds after someone gets unhooked.
Now I believe any problem is pretty much fixed.
-
@RatbasterdJr said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3149640#Comment_3149640
Because I’m challenging your point?😂 I’m not being negative, I’m being realistic.
You're not challenging any point my dude.
Coming out in a thread with people that try to find solutions, and providing no solutions yourself, and no arguments about how the solutions provided by others don't work doesn't mean you're challenging something.
You're just being hard-headed
-
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3149652#Comment_3149652
Killers (and Survivors) have something called ears that they can use to track Survivors, even while blinded
Not if the blind lasts longer, or if the survivor makes no grunt sounds after he gets hit.
See ? If you thought a bit about it, you could have came out with a solution to your problem which was the sounds.
-
It punishes killers that didn't tunnel in a way because you spread out hooks and instead of getting a kill, you end up with the gens popping and a guy on the hook that gets a free escape.
The tunnel protection should stop after the killer gets 4 hooks that were not the same survivor 2 times in a row.
-
The reason does not matter, tunneling should be made almost impossible to accomplish, all that while giving the Killers a bonus for the "nerf"
-
The whole game needs an ambiance rehaul, and each killer should tinker with the music around the map in their own ways