Home Dead by Daylight Forums Discussions General Discussions

Your game is not enjoyable in this state

GardeniaGardenia Member Posts: 1,143
edited July 2019 in General Discussions

From Hardcore SWF teams sitting in low ranks for easy matches bullying killers, to OP killers bullying low rank Survivors, to the freaking grind you place upon new players. To the screwed up matchmaking.


I really hope something changes soon because I don't understand how your philosophy is fun with so many bs mechanics and issues this game has.

«13

Comments

  • martin27martin27 Member Posts: 696

    My killer rank is lower then what i would say my skill is. Since i haven't finished playing survivor, when a killer daily comes along i tend to ignore going for kills and more for choas, point wise i get about 25,000 before getting my daily bonus. Despite the fact for my obvious lack of trying sometimes i will still get survivors who will stand at the exit gates to tea bag me like i'm not letting them get a win. When i finally make the switch from survivor to killer i have rules i'll follow. I'll try to avoid camping and tunneling, i'll let the last guy have a race to find the hatch., i'll use whatever perks/add on's seem good, I'll slug any recently unhooked survivors and chase the unhooker. I'm still going to play to win but it's just a video game i don't care if i lose.

  • TAGTAG Member Posts: 11,358

    I personally think blaming the players for using the options they have access to doesn't really solve the problem. It's basically telling them "Sure, the game has a lot of problems, but as long as everyone ignores them, you'll be fiiiiine!"

  • NMCKENMCKE Member Posts: 8,051

    @Rydog

    It's not about the items; it's about how players are "treating each other", and so they use items/offerings/perks to pass on more negative experiences since they are fed up with other players.


    This is really hard to explain, but I'm definitely not blaming players for using items, it's their actions that makes this game terrible. This is exactly like how toxicity ruins your experience of the game.

  • TAGTAG Member Posts: 11,358

    I mean, you said it yourself: "so they use items/offerings/perks to pass on more negative experiences"

    Note how in your long example above, you didn't mention postgame harassment, sandbagging, hostage taking, exploits, DCing. You only talked about the mechanics the players are using as they are supposed to be used.

  • xChrisxxChrisx Member Posts: 917

    Some things are broken, other are pointless, for example ghostface vs good survivors, ez 0k and nurse 5 blink mori or huntress instadown. This game is unbalanced af

  • NMCKENMCKE Member Posts: 8,051

    @TAG

    I feel like if I use an example, it would be easier for you to understand what I'm really trying to say.


    How would you feel if you got completely destroyed by an Iridescent Huntress? Like she didn't even give you a chance to play survivor because she had a terrible day. The problem is that, players don't consider each others fun in the slightest bit which leads down a never ending path.


    I can't really explain this any better, but it's not the items, it's the players not considering the other side as actual people. If I was using Omegablink Nurse for example, I'll still give survivors a chance to have fun, but I wouldn't go all out tryhard because I wouldn't want that if I was them, ya know?


    Are you seeing where I'm coming from?

  • BBQnDemogorgonBBQnDemogorgon Member Posts: 3,592

    I disagree i have a lot of fun with the game. The only thing that hurt my enjoyment recently was Ghost Face and events destroying the queue times.

    I'm hoping Freddy doesn't make me temporarily quit DbD again.

  • No_Cluie_LouisNo_Cluie_Louis Member Posts: 1,088

    i totally agree with this. Two many idiots roam these forums with their one sided and misinformed suggestions, and most people are quite bad at the game too (due to the large learning curve. I feel like we need to listen more to those with lots of hours on both sides

  • TAGTAG Member Posts: 11,358

    I would feel annoyed that the devs don't do anything to rectify the imbalance. Why would I blame the Huntress for using two add-ons they spent bloodpoints on as they were intended?

  • darktrixdarktrix Member Posts: 1,790
    edited July 2019

    I see your view, but the game needs strong design where it is not so dependent on players being sporting to work. As it stands now just one side or the other needs to be toxic just a little to skew the match toward garbage.

  • NMCKENMCKE Member Posts: 8,051

    @TAG

    That's still not the point, forget about the add-ons altogether because it's not helping me tell you what my point is.


    Players don't care about each other's fun.


    If I was clearly dominating the survivor team, I wouldn't keep dominating because what's the fun in that, and it completely ruins the survivors' fun. I'll likely let one of them go, or pretend that I didn't see a obvious Claudette in a corner. I'm treating everyone how I'd like to be treated because it prevents players from being toxic.

  • TAGTAG Member Posts: 11,358

    I mean, that's you, though. You are subscribing to the mentality that your goal is to make sure everyone has fun. If that is how you want to approach things, nothing wrong with that. But that doesn't mean the Spikes whose goal is to win are a detriment to the game. People should be allowed to tryhard because the goal of a game is to win without breaking the rules. It is not fair to those people to be demonized because they want to try their hardest to do their best.

  • RydogRydog Member Posts: 3,203

    @NMCKE It is unknowable to you or me or anyone else why another player is choosing to build the way that they do. You're applying a moral judgment to a game mechanic, and it's easy to draw conclusions about someone's motive or attitude when you're treating your assumptions as fact.

    It is not realistic to expect the game to police players' feelings or perceived sportsmanship. All the developer can do is encourage good behavior and incentivize it via the game mechanics that are presented to the players. If killers were somehow meaningfully encouraged to avoid face camping, for example, that would be a positive step. If disconnects were harshly punished as a deterrence, that would be a positive step.

    I get as annoyed as anyone when, say, I get flashlight stunned multiple times in a match. We can probably agree that this experience does not feel good. But this is a game mechanic that is being deployed strategically, as intended. It is part of the game that is working as intended.

    You also can't expect strangers playing with each other online to exhibit boundless kindness in an adversarial game. It just doesn't work like that. The game mechanics themselves are all that we have to back up and incentivize good behavior.

  • NMCKENMCKE Member Posts: 8,051

    @TAG @Rydog

    "You also can't expect strangers playing with each other online to exhibit boundless kindness in an adversarial game."

    That's what I do, and if more people were to take small steps towards becoming more kind to each other, that would cause toxicity to drop. I'm not saying you need to completely stop trying your best, or stop tryharding, you're free to do whatever you want within the rules. However, I'm saying if you try your best to give players what you would want, people would love this game a whole lot more. Sometimes you have to tryhard, but other times, it's really unnecessary, and it can drive people away from the game.


    Overall, whenever you can and if you want to, give other players chances. It can really make the difference for them to carry on your kindness, and reduce toxicity.

  • RydogRydog Member Posts: 3,203

    @NMCKE I support the idea and the notion of human beings acting with kindness towards each other, I really do. But we both know it is not realistic to expect or plan around good and unselfish behavior in an anonymized online space. We could get into a whole big discussion about how this has impacted the world for the worse in the last couple of years especially.

    But in this specific instance -- a competitive asymmetrical video game where frustrations run high and both sides demonstrably feel slighted constantly -- it is down to the game mechanics to encourage and enforce the kind of behavior that the developers feel is appropriate for their user base to exhibit.

  • twistedmonkeytwistedmonkey Member, Trusted Posts: 4,255

    I think given the tools people just use what makes them strongest and when that happens in a game the other side can react to do the same and it keeps spiralling.

    It all depends on what you want out of the game.

    Some play for pips, bloodpoints or just fun and others kills or escapes. Players tend to focus on the aspect they enjoy and use what gives them the best chance.

    Winning is different to each person so its hard to balance for one aspect and not hurt the others.

    It's why I personaly think the matchmaking should not be done off the current rank system but take more info into account so bullying can't be done as easy and SWF should go off the best ranked player.

    A 5k hour killer should not meet a 50h player and vice versa. It makes it harder to balance and can skew the stats.

  • RydogRydog Member Posts: 3,203

    To the OP's point (hi @Gardenia we should play more soon!), yes, it sucks that skilled players have no incentive to NOT intentionally de-rank so that they can coast through easy games versus mismatched opponents for kicks.

    The developers should fix this by attaching clear meaning and rewards to the ranking system, kinda like how every other competitive game with a ranking system has done. It's their fault it is this way, and they deserve every ounce of criticism for allowing it to persist for three years.

  • darktrixdarktrix Member Posts: 1,790
  • RydogRydog Member Posts: 3,203

    @NMCKE I myself do often try to take actions that I personally feel are equitable and fair when, say, one of the survivors disconnects immediately (I might let them finish a gen, or just kinda mill about and chase without being very aggressive). And when I wind up downing someone right at the open gate, sometimes I'll let them crawl out because I know how awful it feels to get caught right at the finish line.

    But you can't EXPECT that kind of behavior from everyone. It's a losing proposition if you try to.

    Imagine if the game mechanics awarded survivors an instant gen completion if someone disconnected (and also, say, immediately de-ranked that guy -5 full ranks and/or docked 100k BP). Now THAT would be a way to account for bad behavior within the mechanics themselves, and a good attempt to keep a bad actor from ruining it.

  • ArecBalrinArecBalrin Member Posts: 636

    The 'audience'(IE; survivors) actively lobbied for all of the features that have produced the state of the game as it is now. Killers are blamess; we're not listened to.

  • TAGTAG Member Posts: 11,358

    I want to push myself as best as I can and be given a challenge, so that is what I do when I play.

  • RydogRydog Member Posts: 3,203
    edited July 2019

    The players did not design the game or choose how to implement any of its features. If they implemented even half the ideas on these forums, the game with be unplayable. Players are not game designers, and I definitely, definitely assure you that Behaviour knows this. You have a very weird and entitled worldview.

    EDIT: Also, it's so weird to me to see this kind of aggressive tribalism. You'd think we were discussing politics, the way that people cling to their 'sides' with regard to survivor and killer. I suspect that data would show us most players play both roles. I know I definitely do, and believe that the game would obviously be better with a more even balance.

Sign In or Register to comment.