thefallenloser
thefallenloser
About
- Username
- thefallenloser
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Shroompy said:
Content creators are more inclined to post games where they win since thats gonna get more views.
As for facing coordinated groups who loop flawlessly consistently, I have yet to see anyone who claims so and has proof to back it up
this isn't even necessarily true. lose compilations always seem to do pretty well
-
in 90% of your games killer is absolutely easier
most survivors these days are literal bots or play like them, you should not be losing that often on the role w/ a 65% kill rate
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3901157#Comment_3901157
you have every right to not enjoy going up against a killer, but you have no right to demand that the killer be changed to make playing against it more fun.Sure you do. If you are a player of the game you have every right to say 'I'd enjoy this product more if X was changed' or even 'I'll stop using this product unless X is changed'.
You have the right to enjoy whatever, you also have the right to express that opinion, and every right to continue or not to use the product. You just don't have a right to consider your personal view any more important than anyone else.
as a survivor, it's your job to survive, whatever gets thrown at you. if you queue up, you do it knowing that whatever is about to happen is going to try to kill you.If they introduced a killer whose only power was that survivors needed to listen to Baby Shark on repeat in order to survive, survivors would be perfectly justified in wanting it changed.,
There's no inherent right for anything to exist in the game on either side. It actions on BHVR's part to try and navigate the difficult seas of video game design and find the right path to appeal to enough players to keep the game viable (which they have been remarkably successful at).
since everyone is correct in that there is no universally enjoyed killer, why does it make sense to see bhvr trying to create a universally enjoyed killer?This is kind of the Nirvana Fallacy. No solution will ever be perfect, therefore, why try? Yes, everyone has their own issues with the game that are not shared by the community at large. However, there are issues for which a significant portion of the player base shares an opinion and it is completely logical to try and address those larger issues, even if the solution will not totally resolve all complaints.
BHVR has that data and it really looks like there is a substantial amount of Skull Merchant dislike.
and even besides all of THAT, her pickrate was not big enough for anyone to have been concerned about seeing her more than once a month. so literally why does it matter how much you like playing against her when she was already a niche pick in the first place?If the occasions of playing against her at that rare, but the reaction is still so viscerally strong, all the more reason to change her.
im not saying you have to like vegetables, but you do have to eat them.Except this is a video game. It's not something players have to do at all. They do it because its fun, if they didn't have fun, they wouldn't do it (which would be bad for BHVR and the rest of the players).
99% of the playerbase is never going to enjoy going up against every killer, nor should they expect to or be expected to. DBD having a varied killer roster w/ a variety of unique playstyles is a good thing.
If BHVR creates an unpopular killer w/ a niche playstyle but a dedicated fan base, they should absolutely be willing to explore how to change that, I agree with. But as designers, the team has a responsibility to the community to keep intact what players enjoy about something— as much as they can. The proposed changes don't even attempt to give concessions to existing Skull Merchant players and only serve to erode what few remaining players she has left.
Many of the people that so viscerally hate Skull Merchant don't even know what her power does at this point. Instead of trying to appease to players' irrational hatred of the character, the team should be focusing on improving the design that's already there, not removing it outright.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3900675#Comment_3900675
You can't design slow methodical killers in a game that actively discourages teamwork and communication by design, and also matches players by skill in a very broad manner. Beyond that, trap killers absolutely kill the pacing of trials when they play around their traps. The vast majority of players don't want a 20 minute slog of game in an unranked queue.
There are already slow and methodical killers in the game tho?
-
bro killer is the easiest it's ever been. i know you may have gotten destroyed by a four stack before you posted this— i get it, but killers are objectively the strongest they've ever been and i am winning the great majority of my killer games
-
@lettuchia said:
No. Killers should be encouraged to use their power, stealth killer gameplay is faceroll enough as it is
? lol ghostie is bottom five killers in the game, if anyone needs to be using their power effectively, it's ghost face
-
@Emeal said:
I agree that her identity is very much an intel, Trap hybrid Killer, but please re-edit the first sentence, this is not how we ought talk to other people. Even if they say things we dont agree with or find infuriating.
I'm making a bit of a joke more than anything, though it is literally true that the forums has a reputation for people just uncritically screaming into the void even though they have no idea what they're talking about.
-
guys they did it let's goooo
-
@Sudzer said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3895887#Comment_3895887
Honestly 2 seconds of charging at an undetectable 4.6 m/s to charge an ability that has a 10 meter, 45 degree area of effect range (huge) that goes over short obstacles and rapidly applies hindrance debuffs, making it even easier to hit the ability, which leads to the dying state in about 16 seconds from start to finish is not in any way shape or form balanced. Ignoring the entire rest of the kit this is already insane. Death could have just this ability and it would already be tremendously overkill. I’m just giving feedback. It’s your concept so have fun with it, I just think it would be more fun with some more thought out limitations.
I see what you mean but I don't see it as that powerful personally lol. Undetectable is quite useful, but survivors who position themselves w/ this ability in-mind shouldn't have an issue (also in my head this killer is almost as loud as old Dredge lol), as they have quite a few windows of grace when playing around this power.
2 sec wind-up to get to vaults or pallets.
2.5 secs of no power any time the button is pressed.
Necrosis also has to be on the survivor for the entire duration of the ability to only get 60% of 1 of 3 health states. So if I wanted to use exclusively this power to down, assuming the survivor is standing completely still:
2 secs charge + 2.5 secs cooldown = 60% of one health state (4.5 secs), + 2 + 2.5 = 1 health state, 20% of health state 2 (9 secs), + 2 + 2.5 = 80% health state 2 (13.5 secs), + 2 + 2.5 = 2 health states (deep wound), 40% of health state 3 (18 secs), + 2 = 3 health states (dying) (20 secs).
If the survivor is standing completely still it'd take 20 secs to put them in the dying state, but we aren't balancing around AFK survivors of course lol. Windows would will be pretty good against this killer, and getting the stun essentially guarantees you lose a stack, though pre-dropping would probably be even more powerful when it comes to denying Necrosis. Essentially survivors would be playing similarly to a short range Plague/Huntress(?) where putting any obstacles between themselves and the killer is highly encouraged.
I did initially think of Necrosis having a smaller range though, and a bit of a movement speed decrease, either for the duration of the power or during the wind-up. So I'd probably tune it down to 7 meters (maybe shrink the cone to 35 degrees), and then have a move speed reduction during the charge to 3.9 m/s.
-
@Sudzer said:
Death is a cool idea for a killer, however this sounds pretty insanely broken. The perks are insane, the power is insane, he would destroy every lobby without difficulty because from the sound of it there is absolutely zero counterplay. Maybe think about ways you can limit Death’s abilities, which will enhance the overall quality of your idea and make it a more engaging character
The killer's high lethality is supposed to be balanced out by their lengthy wind-up times/cooldowns, reduced move speed/increased terror radius, and limited power usage. Positioning is key against this killer, encouraging survivors to stay around loops and vaults to deny The Reaper a hit of Reaping, while encouraging the killer to be wary of their power usage, as if they just spam it they'll turn into a basic 115% killer w/ a relatively mediocre power (though they do still have the benefit of Undetectable). Trust, I thought quite hard on how to make sure a killer w/ a power as dangerous as this fair. I think players should be fine as long as they think and don't panic!
-
@TheSingularityMain said:
Wouldn't work tho
???
why? could you give more detailed feedback plz? -
@TheSableSimp said:
Good idea.
I think one mandatory change that should happen is survivors not being able to reveal you on hook. Or at least reduce the range they can reveal.
I get that it was added to prevent camping, but:
1. You can still camp as Ghostface, you just have to position yourself where they can't reveal you.
2. Camping as Ghostface is stupid idea anyway.
3. It's a massive annoyance. You get revealed from 30 meters away behind a rock by a hooked survivor
I did actually suggest earlier this week that Ghost Face get the delayed reveals add-ons on hooked and downed survivors added to basekit!
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/434058/a-couple-more-ghost-face-tweaks-to-make-him-perfect#latest -
@SidneysBane1996 said:
These all seem really good for Ghostface. I have said for a long time Chewed Pen and Lasting Perfume need reworks, because they encourage bad play. Your suggestions are great!
I like the idea of making Thrilling a bit stronger, it's good info and not terribly strong gen hold. This would bring it in line with others. I also like that Furtive Chase rework, it encourages spreading hooks and gives a benefit for doing so. 5% haste for 30 seconds may be a little much, but it's understandable.
Thanks for leaving a comment!
To elaborate on why I think that Thrilling and Furtive should be buffed in the ways I mentioned: I think the design of both these two perks is pretty healthy. Thrilling is an info perk that can also act as slowdown on gens not being actively worked on. That being said, the info this perk gives isn't entirely as reliable as a simple aura, even though it can get around aura blocking effects like Distortion. Dropping the cooldown on such a meh perk I think will allow it to get a bit more use even when downing and hooking many survivors quickly. And since Furtive is a hooking perk that encourages you to spread hooks by targeting only the Obsession, I think the effect could stand to be a bit more tangible and rewarding for how much the killer has to go out of their way to get any use outta this perk. Also, I feel like usually what happens is that when this perk activates, by the time I actually want to actively use the effect (especially on low mobility killers i.e. Ghostie himself) there's only like 5 seconds left haha.
And yeah, it feels really weird to be able to get snapped out of Night Shroud by a survivor on hook or downed across the map— and it feels really painful on more open maps like Autohaven and Coldwind.
-
@Bookern said:
Devs confirmed they aint gonna disable killers power in any form
I certainly think they should consider walking that back.
-
@Chocolate_Cosmos said:
Since its very rare and hard to stun Nurse it would be almost pointless change.
Blight allready got nerfed so this would be overkill.
That is the point. This should be relatively difficult to pull of because it is a strong effect. It's rare and hard to pull off because oftentimes the pallet is the least viable option for survivors. Adding something like this in would also make these two generally be more wary of pallets. The risk/reward factor.
Also the Blight nerfs just took him from insane tier to slightly less insane tier (he's still the second best killer in the game).
-
@Smoe said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3778279#Comment_3778279
Except that's why genres exist, DBD falls within the horror genre because it was created with the intent of being horror, Tomb Raider is not a horror IP because it is not created with the intent on being horror primarily.
Me when I don't know media can use multiple genres at once lol.
-
@Smoe said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3778266#Comment_3778266
Mikaela is original to DBD, which is created and classified as a horror game, which makes her a horror character by default just like all other original characters created for the game itself.
Incredibly narrow minded view of what horror can and can't be.
If Tomb Raider slapped a horror tag on Steam would it then count as a horror IP to you?
DBD doesn't need to exclusively take from franchises that call themselves horror. As long as it is thematically and tonally consistent, it is okay.
-
I appreciate that you acknowledge that this is a problem that you only have, but my question is: why?
-
@Mooks said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3358189#Comment_3358189
You know.. all of this would probably not fit into one single update anyways and would probably need to be addressed in several updates. Could make that maybe in-between chapters and call those updates Midchapter updates.
seriously though, agreed on all of this. But, they just need to change their priorities away from new killers/survivors and more to game health, quality of life, bug fixings, balancing in general. One health chapter won’t do anything. And I can promise you that most people who are asking for a health chapter would be greatly disappointed if we ever got one and would complain about no new content (not accusing you of it but I have seen plenty people here on the forums asking for this kind of chapter act exactly like that with QoL based midchapter updates already)
as others have said, add new stuff to get for auric cells in the in-game shop, Mori animations, maybe additional emotes for survivors, Lobby music, killer power skins, etc to compensate
Probably should have worded it better instead of just saying health chapter, yeah. When I use that term I’m referring to multiple updates purely to focus on improving the game that’s already there instead of adding something new.
-
@whothis said:
No way this should be implemented , it is very easy for someone to abuse it. This is same as saying I don't want to play against XYZ killer.
way to abuse - Don't know how to counter a killer? put other killers in the want-to-play against list.
If there's a limit to how many killers can be selected, then no, this is not true at all.
-
@VideoGameMage said:
How do you think a 6 year old live service game is supposed to pay their employees and license holders, outside of cosmetics and new characters? Licenses aren't cheap, and bhvr piles more and more each year. I'm not surprised bhvr is testing out FOMO tactics now (even though it's still scummy). Surprised it took them this long really.
Your point about this game being behind a 20$ "paywall" is silly considering how often this game goes on sale for cheap or even free on consoles (I believe it's even free for Microsoft game pass users, and was available for free on epic games).
See: Warframe.
Last time DBD was "free" on PS was in 2018. And that was with a yearly $60 payment for a limited window of time. Stop calling subscriptions with additional side content "extra free stuff."
-
@Alcatraz1337 said:
I thought this would be a quality post but as soon as you said DBD monetization is inferior to OW2 monetization, it became obvious that having any kind of discussion would be pointless.
I played both games for +1k hours and had completed the OW2 battlepass 2 weeks ago. If you truly believe that OW2 monetization does even a single thing better than DBD, you have no clue what you are talking about and try to make up an argument out of thin air.
OW2 battlepass consists of 80 tiers of filler content with maybe 3 worthwhile skins, 1 of which appears at the last tier. New legendary skins cost 20 bucks. Many of those skins are super-low effort as well and resemble simple recolors (Junker Queen). I have yet to see a low-effort DBD skin at rare rarity or higher, OW2 skins are mostly recolors outside of Legendary (and sometimes even then). So aside from OW2 battlepass being essentially worthless, you also need to buy it anew each season as it does not pay for itself, like the DBD battlepass does.
Bottom line? DBD's monetization definitely is not great and there is lots and lots of room for improvement. But it honestly is not even a contender for being the worst system on the market. Comparing it to OW2 illustrates a gross misunderstanding that leaves me questioning, whether you are shitposting.
Did you even read the post. It's like half the people just saw "Overwatch" and "better" in the same sentence and turned their brains off, not even trying to look for contextual reasoning. I didn't say it was better overall, but they do some things better than DBD certainly, and to deny it just feels disingenuous.
The entire purpose of the comparison was to note that even those at the bottom line are doing better in certain aspects.
-
@KateMain86 said:
This kind of criticism of monetization is just strange to me. First, you pay a 1 time fee and can play the game for the rest of your life or until it doesn't exist anymore. I think that is a pretty good deal. You can unlock a lot more content for free just by playing the game. I'm actually surprised not more stuff in the shop is auric cells only because profit from selling the game alone only goes so far. Battle passes are good because it allows you to pay a 1 time fee for multiple rewards that could've otherwise been thrown into the shop and sold separately. Everything extra offered for each character is just that, extra. I think its great that developers can create new things for the games they work on and sell them. I wouldn't like to be an artist and paint one masterpiece to sell then offer everything else I do in my career for free. I feel like this is just people having different values and feeling like more should be offered for less. No it shouldn't. Players should be thankful that anything at all is able to be obtained for free just by playing the game. When you bought the game you didn't buy special access to everything that will be made available to any character you decide to play for the duration of your play time of the game. You bought the base game. Thats it. Nothing more. You want that cool shiny legendary outfit for your favorite survivor? Then buy it and support the people who spent their time to make it for your entertainment.
What a strange rebuttal. Artists don't receive direct funds based on each skin they sell. Furthermore it's not like free to play games just deny access to players for random reasons. My point was that the game could be doing much better. In direct comparison to games like Warframe that essentially have one avenue of monetization, DBD is basically a rip off IMO. I also think it's fair to sell additional content but $15 skins with limited customization options is absurd in conjuction with the base game price and the inflating price of owning every DLC.
-
@Raccoon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3252713#Comment_3252713
So, you're saying you get one Battle Pass level per two games and that it only takes 160 games to max the pass?
I mean... I guess? Without any booster it would take like 30 mins a day to max out, and purchasing the pass would speed it up greatly.
Not entirely sure what your point is.
-
@Raccoon said:
OW2 is literally being thrown down into a pit by its community/content creators over its monetization practices as we speak.
OW2 Battle Pass is mostly charms/stickers/voice lines - very few emotes/skins/char intros.
It also takes 55 tiers on the free battle pass to get a new character on release for 'free.'
Average player takes 6 games (3 for dailies to get 9k xp + 2-3 more to get an extra 1000 xp) without the XP boost from the pass to get a level/day.
To get 2+ levels/day would take many more games.
Lootboxes are gone - Skins you could previously get/earn for free during events are now $10-$20.
Current events als.....
Yeah, I'm not gonna bother with the rest - zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Definitely doesn't take 6 games to get a level, I'm a free player on Overwatch. I assume they changed something, cause I can confidently say it only takes two per level.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
If you think overwatch has better monetization you're delusional.
If nothing else, I've spent money on the rift one time. Ever. Over two years playing. I always finish the rift track and recover the entire cost. It's actually a net gain, since you can earn 1050 cells in the rift by the end. BHVR doesn't even incentivise buying it up front with 'increased xp' or 'bonus rift shards', so I can always wait until I hit the break even level in the rift before buying, and I've lost nothing for waiting. My $10 is still gaining value every rift.
Older (rift) cosmetics are brought into the shop and you can earn them with shards just by playing the game. Most cosmetics are purchasable in parts, so you only have to buy the pieces you want for many items. This is the exact opposite of 'bundle only' pricing that tacks on useless crap to drive up the price. Overwatch doesn't even offer an earnable, free currency anymore... you pay real money or you miss out. Even if the item you want came out 4 years ago in an event, sorry, that'll be full price.
BHVR may not be perfect, but the monetization here is extremely fair. Yes, some perks are locked behind real money transactions until they hit the shrine, but I don't even consider that to be too egregious since these are licensed characters. And the stranger things perks were made free to everyone when that license ran out.
Reading comprehension is our friend.
For the amount of ######### Overwatch (2) is getting for its monetization, even that game does better than DBD on more important fronts here.
If you think DBD is better overall, sure. I may be inclined to agree with you.
Good for you for buying the Rift once... I guess?
42 hours per skin with shards.
@Chaos999 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3252468#Comment_3252468
That's not a pay wall. That's just the base game cost and you get a lot from it.
That is... literally a pay wall. It is quite literally a wall you need to clear in order to pay the game.
Stop with the semantics.
-
@Iron_Cutlass said:
Im going to disagree with the "DBD is Pay to Win because all of the best perks are licensed" because the Shrine of Secrets means that you can *technically* get them all for free. I just wish the Shrine of Secrets had a cheaper and better system for getting those perks, even after the perk rework the Shrine is super outdated.
Also the Rift being FOMO is also something I disagree with, since most Rift cosmetics do make a return to the shop, but I feel like BHVR needs to state that on the Rift that way new players do not feel pressured to buy into it by thinking it's like other games. There are also some single piece cosmetics from when the Rift was brand new that should make a return to the shop IMO but I think BHVR has literally forgot about them to begin with.
I'm still gonna subscribe to the idea that it is PTW, since the Shrine is completely random and very inconsistent. Some perks also just haven't appeared in the Shrine to date.
You're right though with the cosmetics returning, forgot about that. :)
@Terion said:
i mean you wanna have more than 6 years of work be given away for free or for 20 bucks? the company behind overwatch is somewhat bigger than Behaviour, they gotta pay their fees, their employes, gotta pay LOADS for technical equipment and the servers themselves cost something to.
BHVRs model is to give dlcs/characters with their aditional perks, and you can unlock ANYONE except the licensed ones for free with shards. I bought an ultimate edition and going to buy the dlc if the characters keep being that interesting to me, just because i dont want to grind. But your not forced to pay characters just because the additional perks, because in this game there is way more than just "killer x with perk y is stronger so you need it". There is strong players that will loop you for 3 gens and there is the ones that cant mindgame the simplest things. As there is strong players on killer side who hits every single hatchet or throwing knife while there is that newbie trapper walking into his own traps. The game has no winning condition too. Its not like if you dont escape/4k you cant progress. It just means you get less amount of bloodpoints.
what do we actually get for free in dbd?
-maps
-bugfixes&QoL changes
-event gameplay
-balancing changes
The employes at BHVR work every day, all of the things they add/change needs new programming, some things that seem minor are not done in 10 minutes. Now i have no clue about programming but i happen to know what costs you have as a company. Ours is small and not in gaming, i cant imagine how expensive running an ongoing game is.
Would you rather get the quality lowered or the amount of content becomes less? Because if they are going to reduce the amount of money they get with their buisness model then we wont see as much work in this game as now. Just backtrack to the few last major updates. 40 perks reworked, QoL changes left and right and you can be sure theyve been working on the bots for quite a long time. Also the changes about the cheater problem. All of that is work that needs to be payed.
BHVR, unlike other, way bigger, companys is very generous. I know a certain big name where you could litteraly wait half a year until they would fix a few very gamebreaking bugs, while they do less, much less work than bhvr does but get way more money because they blatantly sell ingame curtesy. The amount of money they make alone from microtransactions is more than bhvr probably makes a year with all those things they work on. Would love to rant about that certain big name but i dont want to name&shame.
Also ive seen way worse models in other games. Gacha and lootboxes where you really have game concepts which are pay2win but on top of that its rng based IF you get what you need for your money.
And the countless MMO games that only let you explore and see so much but once you reached a certain level or a region you cannot progress further unless you pay like 50 bucks to gain 10 more levels which is if you play alot done in 40 hours. Not exxeggarating.
And lastly, about the skins. Yes. ok they are expensive, your right about that. But thats not something that is forced upon you, personally i bought alot but thats my decision. The skins i have i do use and like seeing them, even on the killers while the weapon is the only thing you see while in a trial, it just gives a bit individality and on the menu it doesnt look all the same. Also i hardly had to pay for much legendary ones, i dont think i got many of those. Even the green rarity stuff and even some of the cheapest looks good, i also like to combine from various sets.
So i dont think the game in general is too expensive, its just right. I rather have it be like it is than having to deal with gacha system or less content.
(edit): i forgot the rift pass. You can buy it once youve reached all levels on the non premium path. As long as the rift is open you can always buy the premium later on and it immediatly gives you all rewards that you wouldve gained. You even gain more auratic cells than you invested in it. it also does not only feature charms (which i agree wouldnt be worth it) but skins too and this one even has bloodpoints.
I'm gonna take this one line by line.
i mean you wanna have more than 6 years of work be given away for free or for 20 bucks? the company behind overwatch is somewhat bigger than Behaviour, they gotta pay their fees, their employes, gotta pay LOADS for technical equipment and the servers themselves cost something to.
I'm just looking for a higher quality of content. I didn't say that everything either needed to be $20 or completely free, and if that's the point you took away I suggest you try reading my post again.
BHVRs model is to give dlcs/characters with their aditional perks, and you can unlock ANYONE except the licensed ones for free with shards. I bought an ultimate edition and going to buy the dlc if the characters keep being that interesting to me, just because i dont want to grind. But your not forced to pay characters just because the additional perks, because in this game there is way more than just "killer x with perk y is stronger so you need it". There is strong players that will loop you for 3 gens and there is the ones that cant mindgame the simplest things. As there is strong players on killer side who hits every single hatchet or throwing knife while there is that newbie trapper walking into his own traps. The game has no winning condition too. Its not like if you dont escape/4k you cant progress. It just means you get less amount of bloodpoints.
Ah yes, after the 42 hours (give or take a few) worth of grind it takes to get 1 single character it is totally reasonable to expect that everyone just earn it for free!
Like that is just absurd. 42 hours of play for one unlock is just not okay.
If I see another "you're not forced to pay." You are essentially strong-armed into either devoting your life to DBD to unlock new characters or paying for them. There is no choice if want to play the character within a reasonable amount of time.
what do we actually get for free in dbd?
-maps
-bugfixes&QoL changes
-event gameplay
-balancing changes
These are just... normal live service additions. Stop trying to market these as special important virtuous deeds BHVR goes out of their way for.
The employes at BHVR work every day, all of the things they add/change needs new programming, some things that seem minor are not done in 10 minutes. Now i have no clue about programming but i happen to know what costs you have as a company. Ours is small and not in gaming, i cant imagine how expensive running an ongoing game is.
I do indeed know how programming works, thank you for explaining I guess?
Would you rather get the quality lowered or the amount of content becomes less? Because if they are going to reduce the amount of money they get with their buisness model then we wont see as much work in this game as now. Just backtrack to the few last major updates. 40 perks reworked, QoL changes left and right and you can be sure theyve been working on the bots for quite a long time. Also the changes about the cheater problem. All of that is work that needs to be payed.
What a weird ultimatum. DBD is such a small scale game that you'd have to be willfully ignorant to believe that they're just barely scraping by with the amount of monetary intake that they'd be receiving. I would like a more consistent and quality product tho. They were the ones that make the weird decision to not just test out perk changes in each hotfix like they should do. Yes, they are working on improving the game, but to suggest that them making their business model more friendly would make the amount of content take a nosedive would suggest that they're a plethora of content to begin with. As I made an example of prior, Warframe is absolutely free and much larger in scale. Hell, even premium cosmetics can be earned for free through trading.
I think you're just choosing not to see something here.
BHVR, unlike other, way bigger, companys is very generous. I know a certain big name where you could litteraly wait half a year until they would fix a few very gamebreaking bugs, while they do less, much less work than bhvr does but get way more money because they blatantly sell ingame curtesy. The amount of money they make alone from microtransactions is more than bhvr probably makes a year with all those things they work on. Would love to rant about that certain big name but i dont want to name&shame.
Yes, that company is named BHVR. Are we just gonna ignore that broken state of multiple updates in a row back in 2020-2021? How console is still terribly optimized? Acting as though BHVR is a shining virtue among the gaming industry just feels gross and ignorant, and to suggest that BHVR is generous is actually hilarious. Though, I guess among the wave of cynical, downright predatory marketing in the modern industry they are at least doing better than many others.
And lastly, about the skins. Yes. ok they are expensive, your right about that. But thats not something that is forced upon you, personally i bought alot but thats my decision. The skins i have i do use and like seeing them, even on the killers while the weapon is the only thing you see while in a trial, it just gives a bit individality and on the menu it doesnt look all the same. Also i hardly had to pay for much legendary ones, i dont think i got many of those. Even the green rarity stuff and even some of the cheapest looks good, i also like to combine from various sets.
The problem, once again, is that these expensive skins which could be way better are instead coupled along with the various other monetization methods of the game. Good for you for buying the skins. They are still too expensive.
-
@fengminenjoyer said:
No way you can say anything positive about overwatch 2, even less say they do ANYTHING better than DBD lol im a player of both, blizzard has completely ruined the system of their game, they are not getting a single cent out of me with how greedy and anti-consumer they are. Their battle pass is a joke, you get NO currency return (which you do in DBD), theres only a few skins that look their rarity, their monetization is absolutely ridiculous, 20+ dollars for a legendary? i mean really? in a game where us OG players were able to get everything for free just by playing and doing challenges? not a single compensation or reward for us og gamers after shutting down the game we payed for and forcing 2 on us after they said both games would co-exist, scamming players with their misleading bundles (which is actually illegal), charging for cosmetics that have always been free, even using old skins as "rewards" for the paid version of the game, instead of you know, putting effort in new items as an incentive + an amount of currency that isnt enough to buy most bundles, their complete radio silence in the months coming up to the release cause they knew us og players would be against all the system changes so they left us in the dark and didnt clarify doubts, no pve which was the main interest point of the "sequel", 2 only exists cause they wanted to change the monetization system that 1 had but they couldnt do it and keep the game as the og cause that would have driven a huge portion of the player base away. The free to play was just their way to try and get new players cause they left the game for dead for years, only three new characters (and one of them is locked in the battle pass....meaning new players had to grind for her) in a "sequel" that plays exactly the same is laughable.
DBD isnt perfect but out of the games i play, its one of the best with their monetization system, a company has to make their money, of course, but theres always ways to make it consumer friendly and BHVR only keeps improving, recent examples are the rift and shard changes. BHVR actually makes me want to spend money on their game, unlike blizzard. I love both games, but DBD is in a faaaaaaar better position regarding monetization than overwatch, and many others. Im heavily critical of BHVR on lots of things but i think their monetization isnt one that deserves it.
Nah, I think the monetization deserves criticism. It seems as though you have more of a problem with the fact that Overwatch's monetization is worse than it used to be... which I agree with. However, it certainly requires a whole lot less paying for more stuff than DBD does, though $20 skins are not okay.
DBD made an improvement to The Rift after like 3 years which is cool. I still think it's okay to ask for better though. I cannot agree in good faith that their model is consumer friendly with the amount of paywalled content, which can be an awful deterrent for newer players.
@Jay_K said:
Few things i disagree with.
Firstly $20 pay wall isnt entirely correct as you can obtain the game a lot cheaper. Even if you do pay the full price on steam its not exactly the most expensive game out there.
Next you talk about the seemingly never ending DLC released. And yeah to a degree i agree with you. it does get a bit much and personally I would like to see them tone this down to maybe 3 releases of paid DLC per year with 1 release of a free DLC each year for players who can't afford to pump more money into the game. Having said that the DLC isn't overly expensive considering other games out there with a lot of DLC.
On the topic of cosmetics whats wrong with paid for cosmetics. It gives you no advantage in game (actually a disadvantage due to the brightness of most cosmetics) and is just something fun you can do if you want to support BHVR. All games have in game cosmetics you can buy with real money its just the way the world works, man even Minecraft bedrock edition you have to pay for skins lol. I think in game cosmetics are absolutly fine to be charged for as the this is a company that wants to make money and they won't make enough of the game and DLC alone to continue to create the game.
Finally the Rift. Now this is again where I slightly agree with you. Most of the cosmetics on the rift are charms and charms are inherantly usless. No one looks at them on survivors and barely anyone looks at them on hooks. Now there are some amazing cosmetics on the paid for rift such as the ghostface masks this rift. Again this is an optional thing that people can buy and in no way is it forced or required so overall its fine to have.
Now i don't say this next bit with any hate but the bottom line is if you don't like that something is paid for then don't pay for it. its everyones choice if they want to pay for cosmetics or DLC or even the rift.
Dunno what you mean by saying you can attain the game for cheaper. If anything I was being generous. While it's listed as $20 for Steam and Epic games, it's $30 for console players. And they're getting a worse product. The point isn't that it's a terribly high bar of entry, but that they're so much monetization that in comparison the price tag seems a bit steep.
The DLC also isn't terribly expensive individually, but combined with the additional monetization it gets a bit much, also new players are probably gonna wanna experiment with different perks/characters, and they'll be faced with a much larger upfront cost.
Once again, you're missing the point here. The cosmetics are pretty expensive here and game do sell cosmetics tend to be free to play, which DBD isn't. Also the cosmetics are pretty restrictive and a bit low effort for how much they cost IMO. They could let you mix and match more of them, change colors of certain parts, etc.
Just because something is being normalized doesn't mean that it's okay.
-
@Chaos999 said:
What do you mean by the $20 pay wall? Like the initial cost?
Yes. The base game costs $20.
-
Um, no. The devs talked about this like 2 years ago when movement got changed and 360s and spins were added back in as an intended mechanic, and it's still in a worse spot than it used to be.
-
@dugman said:
Just speculation on my part but I think they wanted to take advantage of their new bot pathing they were working on this year to make a killer that used bots as companions. I wouldn’t be that surprised if they leveraged parts of the custom bot programming to be able to program the Knight’s guardians.
I'm certain that's what his introduction was for, so he'll almost certainly be getting better over time, though I'm still quite disappointed that it seems as though The Legion won't get any sort of 4 man play in the future considering their concept.
-
@Mandy said:
I would completely disagree with the pay to win aspect, as someone has already mentioned, the strongest killer in the game is free...and there's no denying the fact that she's the strongest.
What you're talking about is wanting to play the other characters, because you or your friend are better with them - that doesn't make something pay to win as you can still "win" without those characters. Playing the game unlocks more things, you can unlock characters/perks with shards etc as well as some cosmetics - this of course encourages gameplay, but it's definitely not about paying.
I think that's a bit of a grimy way to think about it. Many of the strongest perks are paywalled off and not everyone plays killer or is going to play the same killer in every game, in which the rest of the strongest killers are also paywalled.
This game is definitely pay to win to an extent and I don't really get why we pretend it isn't TBH.
-
@Jplanas98 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3006741#Comment_3006741
You realize the sole purpose of limited FOV is too limit the range of the Killer's attacks and limit their visibility so survivors can juke them or escape from them due to their limited sight, which is why certain perks increase FOV. It's not a victim complex when that is the entire purpose of that mechanic, otherwise there's no reason not to implement an FOV slider.
There are literally 2 perks that increase FOV. One being Shadowborn and the other being Monitor. Neither of these perks have a necessary FOV function, and “FOV techs” are anti-player and is not an explained and laid-out mechanic of the game. The limited sight a killer has comes from their first person camera, not the FOV.
-
Wait… what? This is an overly complicated solution to giving Legendary characters prestige skins, and it also removes value from players on their dollar by no longer releasing chapters with 2 survivors and instead just one.
Just make it so that players automatically get the prestige for the Legendary character if they have the character and are prestiged. They literally already do this for The Legion by unlocking both Frank and Julie’s versions of the outfit on prestige, so I’m not sure why it doesn’t work for everyone.
-
@Tsulan said:
Whats wrong with nurse? Just because you find 1 god nurse in 1000 matches doesn´t make the other 99% you encounter OP. She still has the lowest kill rate of all killers.
Most importantly, if survivors actually took their time to learn how to play against Nurse, then no one would complain about her.
Aren't there literally tournament level players who acknowledge that The Nurse is pretty unbalanced? Kill rate is not indicative of balance; see Hillbilly and Plague.
We have to consider the balance of the killer to be relative to how they are played when the player understands how they work well. Nurse doesn't just need a nerf. She's an anachronism of the DBD of elder days. She needs a full on rework, from the ground up.
-
@foxsansbox said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2965788#Comment_2965788
Several of the positively affected killers (And survivors, as we know what FOV does for them), do not have vignettes.
Then just... add a vignette...? I don't really get your point here. The issues you've called attention to could be addressed in tandem with the proposed FOV slider.
-
@foxsansbox said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2965035#Comment_2965035
The Shadowborn FOV is the difference between Nurse seeing or not seeing a survivor when she fatigues. People don't use it because eventually you'd just move on to meta perks anyway, and then you're readjusting to the FOV. Nitpick about the word it is a significant benefit and even more so if it was a config setting.
It’s not even that bug of a deal, and you’re acting like they can’t just increase the vignette as the FOV increases.
-
@TragicSolitude said:
Boil Over was a terrible idea for a perk from the get-go. When the wiggle increase is too high, it incapacitates console players and can make someone with Boil Over unhookable on certain maps. That's not acceptable. You can't make a perk ridiculously OP against a large percentage of the playerbase just to make it viable against the other percentage. BHVR needs to come up with a better purpose for the perk.
As a console player, just walk straight. Unless there’s something wrong with your right thumb, Boil Over is not as debilitating as people are making it out to be.
-
I’m not sure about survivors getting an FOV slider, but for killers, yes! The low FOV is eye grating and makes me sick after about 10 mins, and I don’t think Shadowborn is a viable solution.
-
@dbd900bach said:
Unfortunately the facts remain the same. Until other killers are buffed to a competitive state, Nurse cannot and should not be touched. Yes we have Blight and Spirit but we need more then that. Wraith, Trapper, Billy, Trickster, Hag and so on either need much needed buffs or reworks to become stronger. However I fear the game may be dead before they get that far but dbd has persevered this long so I still believe in it
Nothing in this game is in a competitive state and we need to stop acting like it is. Granted, this is not the direction that Nurse should be changed in, but competition is not a good excuse.
-
Nah, exclusive cosmetics are fine. They have no gameplay advantage and there are plenty of cosmetics in the game.
-
@NekoGamerX said:
well didn't take long for thread to pop up on this.
I will continue this joke until it happens so I can actually laugh about it.
-
It was fine before.
-
I think this my be my favorite Sluzzy post so far.
-
@mischiefmanaged said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2911771#Comment_2911771
Hatch doesn't affect MMR. You cannot go up in MMR rating by hiding and getting the hatch. It counts the match as null and doesn't count it.
You MUST escape through the gate for your MMR to go up. It's unclear if gate escapes after hatch is closed count as an escape. I personally think it shouldn't because I think that it's still random, but they haven't told us what happens in this specific scenario.
As you reference, if you hide all game to wait for hatch, you are much more likely to die since your team is playing a 3v1 and you'll eventually get found. If you are bad in chase, the killer is more likely to prioritize you when they see you since, to them, it's an easy chase and easy hook. Then your rating goes down.
Really my point was that there are a lot of players who don’t do well at all but ultimately escape. Hatch was an admittedly bad example of such. Though, players who do hatch out are keeping their standing abs therefore have an easier opportunity to move forward in the next match.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2911771#Comment_2911771
The MMR system we have is a very normal one, at least in core design. Number goes up if you win, number goes down if you lose, with some adjustments to how much to compensate for a few variables. That's just how MMR systems work.
Grades did have 'less room to slip by', and they were also terrible + did not work as a matchmaking tool.
Ranks, not grades.
Ranks were honestly at least more consistent and fine than MMR, especially before it was changed so Rank didn’t fully reset.
-
@JimbusCrimbus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2911554#Comment_2911554
Fact: If the only reason they aren't down is because of a Dead Hard, they are effectively worse at the game than the survivor who runs a killer without it.
This comment is completely antithetical to the point of Dead Hard there will always be a point in which the only reason someone is still alive is because of Dead Hard, the point of the perk is to extend the chase.
Stop trying so hard to be an #########, the person made a valid point.
-
@JimbusCrimbus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/319759/what-happend-to-dead-hard
Idea: Get better at the game, and learn from your mistakes instead of relying on Dead Hard.
I hate these types of bad faith posts that both insult the player and dodge the question. How annoying.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2911750#Comment_2911750
I'm not necessarily here to defend the concept of an MMR system again, but it seems really weird that people insist the MMR system cannot possibly measure skill when it's such a commonplace method of matchmaking. Surely if it's this well-trodden and studied, there must be at least some benefit to it?
Yes, of course MMR can possibly work, but in its current iteration these kinds of nonsense changes don’t do anything to address the fundamental flaws with the system as it is. Obviously, people who are escaping more tend to have more skill than those who are not, but then you also have the thousands of Claudettes who hide in a corner and get the hatch. In comparison, ranks had less room to slip by, as you had to actually contribute in all areas to advance. Getting into this same song and dance with BHVR just makes them look like they are spewing nonsense and doing even know how their own fans actually works.
-
@jesterkind said:
...Did we read the same update?
The grade-based test seemed like a complete failure from how they described it. One sided matches, with kill rates going completely haywire to be too high at the top + too low at the bottom. It wasn't just because of rank reset, it's because the grade system doesn't accurately reflect skill on a large enough scale to work as a matchmaker as well as having the flaw of players who haven't played for a while getting lowered too far.
(Also, they... seemed to be portraying seeing grades as negative, not positive?)
The problem is that neither does MMR, since it’s still only based on wind and losses. I’d try actually wanted to improve matchmaking, the better changes would be targeted at what determines skill outside a win and loss first and then these other things second.