Home News Developer Activities

I Too Watched the Dev Stream (But Not At 4AM This Time)!

13»

Comments

  • NuclearBurritoNuclearBurrito Member Posts: 6,755

    They never said it went down, they said it didn't go up, meaning it probably stayed about the same as before. There is absolutely no reason to doubt this claim, since they wouldn't lose face from saying something like "and the hook suicide issue is something we will deal with separately at a later time" or even "and hook suicides have not gone up as much as DCs have gone down making it a net benefit" or even just not bring it up at all.

    Saying something missleading? Maybe, but we have no reason to think they would ever knowingly lie to our faces. And trying to call them out on it just means it was pointless to ask the question at all.

    Besides, why do you think they are lying anyways? What method are you using to tell the difference between a reality in which hook suicides have gone up and they lied about it, vs a reality where hook suicides have not gone up and you just notice games with hook suicides more than games without hook suicides because of how human perception works? Did you run any experiments? What methods are you using to ensure you aren't accidentally causing hook suicides yourself? Ect, ect ect.

    Point is, they can have that data, and aren't incentivized to lie about it since the fall out from being proven to be lying would be worse than the benefit of the lie itself. Meanwhile you are just some random guy on the internet who at best has played a bunch of trials. What basis could you possibly have to accuse them of lying!?

  • Demogordon_RamsayDemogordon_Ramsay Member Posts: 1,503
    edited May 2020

    I see more and more hook suicides as time goes on. But it's not just me.

    People everywhere are complaining about hook suicides and there are even braggarts gloating how they hook suicide to avoid DC penalties. From the community's reaction, it is clear that suiciding on hook is a prevalent issue. Since it wasn't before, that could only mean it's gotten worse—bad enough to be noticeably problematic.

    But despite the fact that everyone and their grandma is reporting an increase in suicides on hook, which, like it or not, does actually point to something rather than nothing, the devs do nothing other than off-handedly say, "No, hook suicides aren't going up" without backing themselves up in any way, directly contradicting a significant portion of the community's experience.

    Sorry, but I don't trust them. To answer your question of "Why would they lie?" It's simple: They don't want to address the issue and just want everyone to shut up about it. And with these devs, who seem to be operating on their own ridiculous agenda and ignoring or even downright dismissing community feedback 99% of the time, I wouldn't be surprised.

  • FibijeanFibijean Member Posts: 8,340

    Totally with you, for the record, wish I could upvote more than once.

    I just wanted to say, in case it helps, this was the exact quote from the stream about hook suicides (can be found timestamped at this point in the video https://youtu.be/WXbh4jwENSw?t=2650):

    not_Queen: "We did look at data, as well, for the number of hook sucides, cause people are saying, 'Oh, people are just switching one for the other' - we haven't seen that much of an increase on that."

    Patrick: "Yeah, I don't even think we saw any statistically significant increase on that. So, that's a thing that it feels like it's happening - it's not really happening that often."

  • DelsKibaraDelsKibara Member Posts: 2,042

    Oh so a very VERY small chunk of the playerbase, that being the playerbase on the forums is what you're staking your claim into? "A Significant Portion of the community" is not as big as you think it is.

    The Forums, Reddit, even the Steam Forums are only a small fraction of Dead by Daylight's actual playerbase. Most people who play this game don't talk on Reddit, they don't discuss balance changes or their experience in the Forums, and the Steam Forums is basically just a group of people trying desperately to get stuff changed but never do because of how one-sided they are and how they alienate other players.

    I would trust the dev's statistics way more than the experience of a "significant portion of the community" when we don't even know how much that actually is.

  • NuclearBurritoNuclearBurrito Member Posts: 6,755

    Or maybe, just maybe, people predicted a hook suicide increase and then confirmation bias took over leading to an increase in complaints despite no increase in incidents.

    Never assume malicious intent where human error is sufficient. And in this case human error would almost certainly cause people to complain about hook suicides regardless of the truth, but is unlikely to make the devs get or give false data.

    Your claim is implausible. Play 100 games, record the number of hook suicides and compare that to a list of 100 games and their hook suicide rates.

    If you don't have some kind of experiment to back up your claim then it really doesn't matter what you've seen, it's all meaningless anecdote.

  • Demogordon_RamsayDemogordon_Ramsay Member Posts: 1,503

    Are you even on the forums? PLENTY of people are reporting an increase in hook suicides. That alone is more evidence than the devs provide, which is, oh yeah, none. It's not my fault you guys don't have eyes to see.

  • DelsKibaraDelsKibara Member Posts: 2,042

    Did you not read what I just said?

    The Forums is not an accurate representation of the ENTIRE PLAYERBASE.

    The Devs look at the statistics and found no increase in hook suicides. Meaning for the entire playerbase, there has been no signs of spikes either up or down when it comes to hook suicides.

    The Devs don't just listen to the forums, they have their own experiences and their own statistics to go back to when making design decisions.

  • Demogordon_RamsayDemogordon_Ramsay Member Posts: 1,503

    The forums is a lot more accurate than the devs' statistics.

    "The Devs look at the statistics and found no increase in hook suicides."

    They SAID they did. Do I believe them? Hell no.

  • DelsKibaraDelsKibara Member Posts: 2,042

    You're clearly not listening or you only want to hear what you want to hear so I'm done with this conversation.

    There is literally no reason for the devs to lie about anything in their streams, it's in their best interests to tell their community nothing but the truth because the community are the people that helps pay to keep the game afloat.

    But, the devs also know the community will use whatever statistics they have against them or to try and prove some fallacy that X Killer is OP or X Perk is Overused or that SWF are Overpowered etc etc. So they don't want to share those statistics with us for a very good reason.

    That said, there is also no reason why they would lie about the statistics that we have been shown. Seriously do what NuclearBurrito is telling you to do. Do 100 Games, and then count how many of them are Hook Suicides, then ask your other friends to also do 100 games and rinse and repeat. I doubt there is actually a massive increase or decrease but if you really want to disprove the dev's statistics, do your own data gathering.

  • NuclearBurritoNuclearBurrito Member Posts: 6,755

    And how did they come to the conclusion that there is in fact an increase? Did they just play a bunch of games and notice some hook suicides? Or did they actually count and compare it to an earlier baseline number?

    The devs have access to computers that track this sort of thing every game. Unless you have something similar your experiences are subject to human error.

    Seriously, look up confirmation bias. That phenomenon is more than enough to explain the increase in complaints.

    Not to mention, while more players are complaining about hook suicides. The Survivors that previously admitted to DCing are not now talking about how they themselves are hook suiciding, which is something we would have expected to see if they actually did switch to doing that. Instead we hear those Survivors complaining about how they can't DC when they get a Killer they don't like, implying that they are now actually playing those matches out, which is exactly what we would expect to see in a world where hook suicide rates are not going up.

    And also, while more people are complaining about hook suicides than before, it's not nearly as much as the number of people who were complaining about DC's. Meaning the overall amount of complaining has gone down.

    Also also, all of the complaining about hook suicides are doing it in the context of the dc penalties not working.

    Meaning we have a lot of:

    "DC Penalties are being circumvented via hook suicides"

    But not a lot of

    "Hook suicides are too common waaa"

    Which means that the people that are noticing a problem are the ones looking for it due to the DC penalties. If hook suicides really were a problem, then people that aren't thinking about the DC penalties would still notice a problem and some portion of them would complain about it in isolation.

    Again this is consistent with a reality in which hook suicides did not go up and peoplejust have confirmation bias. But is inconsistent with a reality in which hook suicides did go up.

  • KyxlectKyxlect Member Posts: 134
    edited May 2020

    It's disappointing that no such question about SWF's was answered and instead, they simply plan on adding additional ways of punishing Killer's for face camping. As if Borrowed Time and Decisive Strike wasn't enough already.

    Just played my first game as Killer in about a week I think and it puts two cancerous SWF's in my lobby with a key no less. Had to slug a total newb (Rank resets put me at Rank 17, also, I haven't played on my main account for a good while, was originally like Rank 6-7ish) just to focus those two idiots after having to wait 10 minutes for it to find a match while playing a level 1 Legion because I didn't expect this AND on a huge ass map. Ugh...just started playing and don't even want to play this stupid game anymore after 1 match..oh, it was like a Rank 2 and Rank 16 that were SWF's along with two newbie solo's. Barely stopped them when they had two gens left and one was trying to escape from hatch after I killed their friend with the key but of course they knew where the key was. OF COURSE THEY KNEW, BEHAVIOR, OF COURSE!

    Post edited by Kyxlect on
  • Atrushan88Atrushan88 Member Posts: 2,065

    If people are going down every 30 seconds there is no possible way that survivors can recover from that. If anyone thinks that's possible for a 4 man escape they're delusional. Even math-wise it's impossible. 12 hooks would take 6 minutes, but very likely the killer would get fewer than 12 because one person would likely not be caught until the end, that one person who's not buzzing around the killer every second. You'd have likely 3 people off gens the whole time. If the killer is getting a down every 30 seconds, that means 2 people are occupying the killer pretty much every time, and another is going for saves. There's no way they can get a 4 man escape that way.

    As for "who possibly has it worse", why does it matter? Unless you're saying "survivors SHOULD be screwed by Dedicated Servers and Killers SHOULDN'T", why do you have to make it some kind of contest to see who is hurt more? I don't understand people who think this way, it's purely just victim grandstanding. Bad hit detection is bad hit detection. If the SERVER guarantees the hit, then it should be a hit. Hatchets should not be boomerangs, and if a survivor is lagging, and the server detects a hit on them, they should get hit. There should be no bias for any side. The SERVER SHOULD DECIDE, not some random person's connection.

  • ABannedCatABannedCat Member Posts: 2,482

    You specifically mentioned the hatchets, which are the ones who are going to suffer the most from serverside hit detection. If the killer has a ping of 100ms, which is in the own words of the developers a "pretty damn good ping", then this means that in that time the survivor covers 0,4 metres when running. This is a masssive distance, in which the killer is getting screwed over by the server. Imagine this for the Deathlinger.

    Even on clientside detection, it is wonky. I can't tell you how many times I had aim dressing lock the camera on a survivor, but then I get no hit rewarded, and I just hit some bunch of air, or a tree, or some box 1 metre to my side. With serverside detection, the server and client even disagree on even where the killer is facing with the camera the moment the survivor comes within range. Its just bound to be a massive frustration for the killer, where you continuisly get robbed of hits you should have gotten. And with the current genrush meta going on, where one mistake at a loop can cost you the game, this is not something killers can afford.

  • domriverdomriver Member Posts: 70

    Hello everyone!

    So Switch user here - when they announced that crossplay is coming - in my mind i immediately thought that in order for this to happen Freddy's content should be enabled soon then on the other platforms that don't yet have access to it right? Or is there a way around this?

  • FibijeanFibijean Member Posts: 8,340

    I imagine that if Freddy isn't on Switch by the time crossplay is enabled, Switch players would be able to play against him but not as him - kind of like if you just happened not to own a particular DLC on any other platform. Unfortunately, since having Freddy available on Switch is reliant on the outcome of ongoing discussions with the license owners, it's the kind of thing that will just happen when it happens. I can't really see them pushing back the release of crossplay just for that, especially since they didn't mention anything to the effect of "we can't have crossplay until these negotiations are resolved" on the stream, so it's unlikely that there's any connection between the two on a technical level.

  • Atrushan88Atrushan88 Member Posts: 2,065

    It doesn't matter who's going to "hurt from it". If they're lagging, it's THEIR problem. You don't see people on League of Legends or ANY other online game saying "Oh I lagged, but the game should be catering to MY lag, not the server's information!". Making a contest about who suffers more from what doesn't matter. Currently, survivors are suffering more from hatchets that should not have hit than killers are suffering from whiffs. I should know, I play plenty of customs with Huntresses. They hit far more that they shouldn't than miss ones they should, even they agree. No one is saying that survivors should be CATERED to, but the SERVERS should determine what hits and what doesn't, not individual players. A killer who is lagging should not be catered to because they're lagging. They should either accept that their internet is crap at the moment and come back and play later, or deal with it. That's the nature of lag. It happens for every game. There is no other game in existence as far as I know where the server is like "Oh, you're lagging? Let me give you that hit anyways! because even though you're lagging on YOUR screen it looks like it hit, even though literally EVERYONE ELSE in the game can see it didn't".

    This isn't a contest of who is going to hurt more from the change, hits should not be detected by the killer. That's the whole reason we have dedicated servers in the first place, because the killer can abuse P2P, and it's not a balanced state to favor one side over the other. There are other things they can do to alleviate problems if a killer turns out to be bad from this change, without making hits that do not hit, hit. You're literally asking for the server to cater to one side by saying that it shouldn't be this way.

  • ABannedCatABannedCat Member Posts: 2,482

    In every online game you are rewarded for being laggy. I can not recall a single shooting game, where I am forced to lead shots according to my ping. No, I can have a 500ms ping, and still aim directly at my enemy, even if they are sprinting across my screen at full speed.

    Dead by Daylight is the only game that is going to actively punish people who don't happen to live close to the server. This is not okay. Instead they should increase their server density, to cover more of the world.

  • Atrushan88Atrushan88 Member Posts: 2,065
    edited May 2020

    There is no way you can have 500MS ping and clearly see things going on as normal in any game. As I saw in another post on a different game(I looked this stuff up to some degree), many games use server side authentication. The thing is, those games worked on their lag compensation code and prediction code to a point that all users with normal lag or latency issues see it as an almost flawless hit detection. No one complains about it. I agree they should add more servers, but that wouldn't solve the issue. People could still VPN and basically cheat the system.

  • RydogRydog Member Posts: 3,105

    The irony of this being a pinned topic right now.

  • Fiv55Fiv55 Member Posts: 350
    edited June 2020
    Post edited by Fiv55 on
  • RydogRydog Member Posts: 3,105

    @Fiv55 The mistake isn't that it's pinned.

  • Sang15512Sang15512 Member Posts: 2

    has good ping going into a match and not being able to do anything about it if they don't. It also means that lag switching no longer confers the same advantage.

  • SekhwekSekhwek Member Posts: 4

    Excellent share

Sign In or Register to comment.