Home Dead by Daylight Forums Discussions General Discussions

Seeing your skill improve is not "toxic elitism"



  • gendossgendoss Member Posts: 2,216

    Well maybe you joined before 2019 because I started lurking in 2019 and posting in 2020. I never saw anybody say "send a pic of your rank". What I did see is people say "oh you're not in red rank so your opinion matters less" but I STILL see people say "I'm in high MMR blah, blah, blah, I have more authority". It never goes away. Just the fact that the game compares skills at all will make people say "I know I'm a good player so I know what I'm talking about". Should they take away fair matchmaking altogether because it creates toxic elitism?

  • edgarpoopedgarpoop Member Posts: 5,082
    edited January 20

    That dev response was absurdly out of touch. The problem they're trying to avoid (toxic elitism) is literally what we have now *because* the MMR is hidden. Every player that loses games is at "high MMR" and is thus immune to constructive criticism as to how they can improve. Players have no idea where their skillset is relative to the high or low end. They assume they're near the cap and everyone else must be below them if they're not struggling. Again, super out of touch.

  • woundcowboywoundcowboy Member Posts: 1,123

    Why should people who don’t know the game have a voice? It would be like asking me about how to design and construct a building. People who don’t put in time to learn the game don’t deserve a voice.

  • jesterkindjesterkind Member Posts: 2,997

    The problem there is that you're assuming a hard causal link between "low MMR" and "no idea what they're talking about".

    The ability to analyse a game is completely, entirely separate from the ability to play it. You can be good at one and not the other- there's a slight correlation between the two, but it's nowhere near something you can assume just from seeing someone's MMR.

    Also, y'know, the experiences of lower-rank players are still valid and it's still worth knowing what they struggle with so that it can be determined whether the teaching tools in the game need improving, if something actually does need to be changed, or if they just need to learn the right strats and counters.

  • gendossgendoss Member Posts: 2,216

    I'll just say that in my opinion most games should be balanced around the higher level of play. In something like Tekken you're gonna get destroyed over and over and that's because the game isn't balanced around the average player or the lower skill level player. But it feels good to grind and eventually get good at the game, it's more healthy when it's balanced around the top level. I don't think it's inherently bad that a newer player would struggle because at some point you have to learn the game and get good at it to where you actually realize the real balance of the game.

  • woundcowboywoundcowboy Member Posts: 1,123

    BHVR doesn’t give teaching tools. They buff and nerf for people who can’t play.

  • SonzaishinaiSonzaishinai Member Posts: 6,188

    Thank you for showing the exact reason why this isn't a bad argument against not showing mmr

  • OiryOiry Member Posts: 170

    I don't want to see it, but I want some kind of sign that I am getting better at the game. Right now you can play 1000 of matches and you will still play the same game of the same difficulty, cause of how MMR works, without any actual feedback from the like "hey, you're doing pretty good"

  • jesterkindjesterkind Member Posts: 2,997

    I disagree. Game balance requires making sure the game is fair for all levels of play. Now, that might mean that some things are very strong and annoying against new players, but as long as they have something to learn to help them out, it'll be fair.

    You can't just ignore newer or less skilled players because given enough time, that means you won't have any newer players.

    Loading tips, tutorial, in-game glossary, perk descriptions with rundowns on status effects, HUD elements that give consistent information as to what's happening...

    What was your point again?

  • BirdSpiritBirdSpirit Member Posts: 186

    They said one of if the reasons it's hidden is because some players get discouraged when the number goes down lol

  • woundcowboywoundcowboy Member Posts: 1,123

    And yet not a single tip on running tiles, using pallets, or running early. Those are all basic mechanics. The game should have a tutorial that teaches these things. It should also have practice against killer powers

  • jesterkindjesterkind Member Posts: 2,997

    Yeah, sure, the teaching tools could be better. Your point wasn't that the teaching tools are subpar, or that they need improvement- it was that they don't exist, and that BHVR balances solely around totally new players.

    Neither of those things are true, and pivoting to something else entirely doesn't make them so.

  • woundcowboywoundcowboy Member Posts: 1,123

    Telling the survivor to do a gen and open the gate doesn’t count as a tutorial. Some of the perk descriptions are also extremely unclear. My point still stands.

  • woundcowboywoundcowboy Member Posts: 1,123

    Protecting a bad player’s fragile ego shouldn’t factor into that decision.

  • jesterkindjesterkind Member Posts: 2,997

    It's more of a tutorial than some other games get. The art of a good tutorial is one that very, very few developers know, and DBD's tutorial is - at least now that they've added the bot tutorial - solidly adequate.

    Which isn't even relevant, because countering your point only requires mentioning that it exists.

  • fcbfcb Member Posts: 104

    Low MMR

    BHVR: you are not a loser, you are the last winner (George Carlin - You're a loser)


  • SunsetSherbetSunsetSherbet Member Posts: 1,292

    Why does a dev team that thinks tbagging and clicking are an integral part of the gaming experience care at all about toxic elitism? Why do they not care about survivor specific toxicity?

  • PredatedPredated Member Posts: 2,458

    you already have that with hours, ranks and even amount of killers.

    I've had a 150 hour survivor tell me that going for me wasnt gonna work out. The guy had 0 hooks, everyone else was hooked 3 times. He could have tanked at least 1 hookstate and save a teammate.

  • konchokkonchok Member Posts: 1,500

    There are still ways to handle this. For example, I would like to know how I rank MMR wise amongst my own killers. Who has the highest MMR and who has the lowest? I would also like to know which killer I improved the most with. So every rank reset if I got a message that said, good job! Your MMR with Billy increased the most/ decreased the least out of all your killers!

  • RipleyRipley Member Posts: 662

    This is already the case. Note how many discussions have qualifiers of 'high MMR' status to bolster their own argument or dismiss another.

  • SpitefulHatefulSpitefulHateful Member Posts: 135

    Also, higher rank survivors already act all condescending to players with a lower rank in a post-game chat, up to the point I've seen comments like "why does this lower rank trash exist" or keep calling low ranks "dogs". So, yes, people don't deserve to flash their MMR until they learn to behave.

  • zarrzarr Member Posts: 431

    I don't think showing ratings would be a big issue. Plenty other games have it, including traditional games and sports, and I wouldn't say they are on average more "plagued" by "toxic elitism" than DbD isn't also already. Elitism is more common with leaderboards, yeah, but not necessarily toxic, just good players being confident in their abilities and wanting to play with and be among more equally-proficient players. Plus in DbD it wouldn't even be (public) leaderboards, or at least that's not what's being talked about here, it would just be seeing your own rating, and perhaps that of the players in your matches. That's a rather limited realm to be "toxically elitistic" in. Basically post-game chat, which can be hidden or skipped, and which isn't even available on console platforms. Online you could just lie about your rating if you so desire, it wouldn't affect conversations and discussions much more than it does already. Same for post-game chat if they were to only show players their own rating.

    That said, I also don't think not seeing ratings is a big issue. If the matchmaking is not pairing similarly-rated players often enough, this would highlight it... but it would also just do that, there's no reason to assume it would lead to the matchmaking being changed: BHVR can already see the ratings, and the reasons why matchmaking is working in the way it is would still be there. Besides, we know the system revolves around killing and surviving, so you don't actually have to wonder much after a match whether you gained or lost MMR - if you escaped or killed at least 2 survivors, you will usually have gained MMR. Plus the system working well or not is also not dependent on showing player ratings, as again BHVR can already see all of these things, and so the system has to be assumed to already be working as well as it possibly can under BHVR's prerogative, which wouldn't change.

    Ultimately the decision would seem to just come down to whether people feel more good about seeing their rating increase/about having a high rating, than they feel bad about seeing it decrease/having a low rating, and I'm not sure what the right call there is. Personally I don't really mind much either way, but I always prefer having more insight, so I would probably vote to show ratings. For everyone in a match, and hell, even public leaderboards. Attach ratings to player names on the platforms and the forum. Tattoo it on their forehead.

  • GloamGloam Member Posts: 250

    It's a bit strange isn't it?

    Survivors being toxic to killer: It's just part of gaming nothing we can do.

    Survivors being toxic to other survivors: Whoa whoa whoa let's cool it with the toxicity here no need to be elitist.

  • throwaway79465468797throwaway79465468797 Member Posts: 682

    MMR is just a number that really has no merit on skill... some people play for fun, others play to farm, some may not have great hardware, etc.

    If you really want to see improvement in yourself then you have to take your gaming to the next step and do what others in your shoes would do... record your games, chases, survivor & killer, and find your own mistakes.

    If you can find your own mistakes then you can improve. Your MMR wont show that because it's still just a number. A number that goes up or down based on builds, survivors, killers, maps (and map stucture) efficiency, and worst of all just plain luck... skill is just one piece of that puzzle.

    Dont chase the number... chase the goal, which is to improve

  • Snow_LepSnow_Lep Member Posts: 284

    My thought entirely. Plays have landed people in high respect despite the amazing play happening in a game that was lost.

  • SonzaishinaiSonzaishinai Member Posts: 6,188

    Really now?

    With that logic they can remove all killer perks from the game and delay the killer spawn by 30 seconds.

    After all Otz has shown that he can still win the mayority of his games this way.

    If you can't you need to shut up and get your fragile ego in check cause you clearly don't deserve a voice if you don't play this game for 8 hours a day.

    I sincerely hope you realize just how idiotic this sounds. Cause that is what your mindset is in a nutshell.

  • illusionillusion Member Posts: 869

    This ^^

    That is the only reason. They know that the matchmaking is not working, and by hiding it we can't show how badly it is matching players, like people used to do with the old system. They don't care about toxicity. There is so much toxic behavior that they simply ignore, and even some that they have bred themselves. The toxicity argument is just an excuse.

  • RyuhiRyuhi Member Posts: 1,535

    you can't see MMR because it doesn't work. You'd be able to see when the matchmaking takes a 20 MMR player and pairs them with a bunch of 2000 ones, and would also give killers information to avoid survivors who vastly outskill them and dodge the lobby. Even if they had it only in post game, it would be just like rank was: a verification of how awful the matchmaking actually is.

    At least this way the majority of the player base is somewhat ignorant.

  • SunsetSherbetSunsetSherbet Member Posts: 1,292

    The sports comparison falls apart because one is an asymmetrical game where one side has 4 players, the other has 1 player, and they work toward completely separate goals rather than the same. In hockey, it's team vs team, there isn't any handicap, and everyone is working toward the same goal (that is, scoring points by hitting the puck into the net.) comparing a game like DBD to a symmetrical sport is fairly dishonest. They aren't similar outside of both being games. That's pretty much it.

  • GwintyGwinty Member Posts: 807

    Well I think this is mostly because they think that people will get into elitist things like "your opinion does not matter, your only have X MMR". Being at lower MMR for whatever reason can be pretty bad. I have experienced it at MOBAS and there people straightup bash you sometimes when you get into their lobby and are of a lower rank.

    If we already have a problem with "toxicity" as some people claim then this should not get added to the game. It would only increase it especially if you could see other peoples MMR.

    Now the question is: How do you evaluate your skill?

    Lets come back to MOBAS. As you know League for an example gives you grades for your champion based on your performance. You get rewards for yourself (and your random teammates I think...) if you hit an S (with S being the highest).

    While the evaluation of skill is pretty good for certain champions it lacks for other champions. Getting an S on a weaker champ or on a supporting character was much harder (at least during my day) than on a DPS or brawly champion. Support characters were even more likely to get their S when they choose to opt out their supportive role and just focus on damage...

    However this "skill evaluation" had no impact on your standing and your ranking up. You could get an S and a shake of hand for this (loot) but your team could still choose to surrender 1v4 after one bad fight thus letting you loose. Points for your rank were gained and lost because of this.

    This approach was interesting non the less because they seperated "Skill" from "Wins". For rank only the "win" mattered but you still had your "S Rating" to show off your skill. This rating could also give you cosmetics like taunts...pretty sweet if you were able to get one.

    Maybe SBMM should have the same: Wins for "rank" and you take your points after the match for "skill". Seperating the S in SBMM and admiting a WBMM, win based match making...

Sign In or Register to comment.