The November 2019 Developer Update is now available: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/103996/
Chapter 14 Teaser:
Give us your opinion! Complete the Players Satisfaction Survey! https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/DbDCSAT
We have updated our Forum Rules. Please take a moment to read through them: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/87004/

It really isn't survivors being toxic its killers.

2»

Comments

  • fluffybunnyfluffybunny Member Posts: 2,161

    @Orion said:

    @fluffybunny said:

    @Orion said:

    @fluffybunny said:

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Keene_Kills said:
    Damn them for taking away the LOL response.

    If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.

    Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.

    The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".

    LOL isn't necessarily a negative reaction, but I can understand if they were having troubles with people abusing it and had to do something to address that. I didn't know that was happening.

    It was primarily used as a negative reaction, so that distinction became irrelevant. And yeah, it was happening a lot. Some people had their "LOL" count increased by thousands overnight.
    The fact that it was being used as a negative reaction wasn't the problem in and of itself, despite what some may claim; it was the abuse and the bots.

    Did they do that to you, too?

    Indeed. It was to be expected, given my high post count.

    I think I was still pretty new to the forums when LOL was a thing. I only got a couple and I had seen it being used for funny stuff, too, so I just assumed it had multiple uses.

  • OrionOrion Member Posts: 11,721

    @fluffybunny said:

    @Orion said:

    @fluffybunny said:

    @Orion said:

    @fluffybunny said:

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Keene_Kills said:
    Damn them for taking away the LOL response.

    If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.

    Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.

    The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".

    LOL isn't necessarily a negative reaction, but I can understand if they were having troubles with people abusing it and had to do something to address that. I didn't know that was happening.

    It was primarily used as a negative reaction, so that distinction became irrelevant. And yeah, it was happening a lot. Some people had their "LOL" count increased by thousands overnight.
    The fact that it was being used as a negative reaction wasn't the problem in and of itself, despite what some may claim; it was the abuse and the bots.

    Did they do that to you, too?

    Indeed. It was to be expected, given my high post count.

    I think I was still pretty new to the forums when LOL was a thing. I only got a couple and I had seen it being used for funny stuff, too, so I just assumed it had multiple uses.

    And it did, but those users who chose to abuse the feature by using bots ruined it for everyone else.

  • fluffybunnyfluffybunny Member Posts: 2,161

    @Orion said:

    @fluffybunny said:

    @Orion said:

    @fluffybunny said:

    @Orion said:

    @fluffybunny said:

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Keene_Kills said:
    Damn them for taking away the LOL response.

    If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.

    Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.

    The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".

    LOL isn't necessarily a negative reaction, but I can understand if they were having troubles with people abusing it and had to do something to address that. I didn't know that was happening.

    It was primarily used as a negative reaction, so that distinction became irrelevant. And yeah, it was happening a lot. Some people had their "LOL" count increased by thousands overnight.
    The fact that it was being used as a negative reaction wasn't the problem in and of itself, despite what some may claim; it was the abuse and the bots.

    Did they do that to you, too?

    Indeed. It was to be expected, given my high post count.

    I think I was still pretty new to the forums when LOL was a thing. I only got a couple and I had seen it being used for funny stuff, too, so I just assumed it had multiple uses.

    And it did, but those users who chose to abuse the feature by using bots ruined it for everyone else.

    This is why we can't have nice things lol

  • MegMain98MegMain98 Member Posts: 1,516

    Both sides can be toxic, simple as that.

    People argue that “killers aren’t supposed to make survivors games fun.” Well by that logic, survivors aren’t exactly supposed to make killers games fun either. It’s just sportsmanlike to leave the hook and find another survivor and not farm the person on the hook or simply escape when the chance arises instead of taunting the killer. Both sides aren’t entitled to make the opposing sides game fun but it’s just sportsmanlike to not make their game awful and be a complete douche.

    You’ll run into salty killers and survivors. Killers that are mad they couldn’t kill the one Nea that was good at looping so they D/C when the exit gates are powered. Survivors that D/C when they are the first one found.

  • BlueberryBlueberry Member Posts: 4,384

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Keene_Kills said:
    Damn them for taking away the LOL response.

    If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.

    Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.

    The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".

    A small minute fraction of the playerbase that was used as a reason for punishing the entire player base..no that was not a good reason for doing away with it. We've already been through this on another page, drop it, we're not going to agree here.

  • OrionOrion Member Posts: 11,721

    @Blueberry said:

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Keene_Kills said:
    Damn them for taking away the LOL response.

    If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.

    Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.

    The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".

    A small minute fraction of the playerbase that was used as a reason for punishing the entire player base..no that was not a good reason for doing away with it. We've already been through this on another page, drop it, we're not going to agree here.

    It wasn't a minute fraction, which the mods have already said.

  • BlueberryBlueberry Member Posts: 4,384

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Keene_Kills said:
    Damn them for taking away the LOL response.

    If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.

    Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.

    The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".

    A small minute fraction of the playerbase that was used as a reason for punishing the entire player base..no that was not a good reason for doing away with it. We've already been through this on another page, drop it, we're not going to agree here.

    It wasn't a minute fraction, which the mods have already said.

    It WAS a minute fraction, which the mods DID already say.

  • OrionOrion Member Posts: 11,721

    @Blueberry said:

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Keene_Kills said:
    Damn them for taking away the LOL response.

    If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.

    Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.

    The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".

    A small minute fraction of the playerbase that was used as a reason for punishing the entire player base..no that was not a good reason for doing away with it. We've already been through this on another page, drop it, we're not going to agree here.

    It wasn't a minute fraction, which the mods have already said.

    It WAS a minute fraction, which the mods DID already say.

    Regardless of what you believe, the minor inconvenience of having to read comments to know if people agree or disagree is worth the trade-off in helping to keep trolls and bots off the forum.

  • BlueberryBlueberry Member Posts: 4,384

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Keene_Kills said:
    Damn them for taking away the LOL response.

    If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.

    Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.

    The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".

    A small minute fraction of the playerbase that was used as a reason for punishing the entire player base..no that was not a good reason for doing away with it. We've already been through this on another page, drop it, we're not going to agree here.

    It wasn't a minute fraction, which the mods have already said.

    It WAS a minute fraction, which the mods DID already say.

    Regardless of what you believe, the minor inconvenience of having to read comments to know if people agree or disagree is worth the trade-off in helping to keep trolls and bots off the forum.

    You are way understating the value of having both agree or disagree options on topics. I think it isn't even remotely close to being worth that trade off. It's also not just an inconvenience of reading comments. Many people will not comment at all because of the added work of posting or that just don't like to post on the forums. You will be getting a much larger and more accurate sample size from an agree or disagree one click option.

  • OrionOrion Member Posts: 11,721

    @Blueberry said:

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Keene_Kills said:
    Damn them for taking away the LOL response.

    If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.

    Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.

    The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".

    A small minute fraction of the playerbase that was used as a reason for punishing the entire player base..no that was not a good reason for doing away with it. We've already been through this on another page, drop it, we're not going to agree here.

    It wasn't a minute fraction, which the mods have already said.

    It WAS a minute fraction, which the mods DID already say.

    Regardless of what you believe, the minor inconvenience of having to read comments to know if people agree or disagree is worth the trade-off in helping to keep trolls and bots off the forum.

    You are way understating the value of having both agree or disagree options on topics. I think it isn't even remotely close to being worth that trade off. It's also not just an inconvenience of reading comments. Many people will not comment at all because of the added work of posting or that just don't like to post on the forums. You will be getting a much larger and more accurate sample size from an agree or disagree one click option.

    Except you won't be, because of the bots making the feature useless with their spam. Even assuming the bots were a minority, when bad behavior goes unpunished, it spreads like cancer. The bot problem would only continue to grow. This way, you get disagreement in a way that is actually conducive to discussion, as opposed to making a single click and providing zero useful feedback.

  • BlueberryBlueberry Member Posts: 4,384
    edited February 2

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Orion said:

    @Blueberry said:

    @Keene_Kills said:
    Damn them for taking away the LOL response.

    If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.

    Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.

    The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".

    A small minute fraction of the playerbase that was used as a reason for punishing the entire player base..no that was not a good reason for doing away with it. We've already been through this on another page, drop it, we're not going to agree here.

    It wasn't a minute fraction, which the mods have already said.

    It WAS a minute fraction, which the mods DID already say.

    Regardless of what you believe, the minor inconvenience of having to read comments to know if people agree or disagree is worth the trade-off in helping to keep trolls and bots off the forum.

    You are way understating the value of having both agree or disagree options on topics. I think it isn't even remotely close to being worth that trade off. It's also not just an inconvenience of reading comments. Many people will not comment at all because of the added work of posting or that just don't like to post on the forums. You will be getting a much larger and more accurate sample size from an agree or disagree one click option.

    Except you won't be, because of the bots making the feature useless with their spam. Even assuming the bots were a minority, when bad behavior goes unpunished, it spreads like cancer. The bot problem would only continue to grow. This way, you get disagreement in a way that is actually conducive to discussion, as opposed to making a single click and providing zero useful feedback.

    " Except you won't be, because of the bots making the feature useless with their spam'
    That is an extreme minority and hardly an issue even worth weighing in

    "Even assuming the bots were a minority, when bad behavior goes unpunished, it spreads like cancer."
    This is like saying some people stab people with pens so we should ban pens. That's how ridiculous that is. How about we actually solve this rationally and actually I don't know, crack down on bots? Seems much more logical

    "This way, you get disagreement in a way that is actually conducive to discussion, as opposed to making a single click and providing zero useful feedback."
    This is undervaluing a much more large and accurate data set or the times when comments are locked such as patch notes where agree or disagree are the only choices.

  • AlexAnarchyAlexAnarchy Member Posts: 685

    @Jake_Parks_prince said:
    Hi killer main here I'd just like to start off by saying in my 1200 hours of DBD across all 3 platforms the only one which I encountered survivors who were toxic toxic was PS4. Other then on PC i have a solid 300 hours and I've had little to no end game toxicity other then when I play survivor and the killer goes "GG EZ noob team." on my 900 hours on xbox I have received 3 end game anger chats. Thats it. It really isn't survivors being toxic because most things survivors do is well needed to survive the match. Pallet looping, is needed to live, 360's is needed to live sometimes, blinds are meh in needs, DS is a basic perk that I haven't had much problem although that may just be luck, and unhooks and body blocking are just what any altruistic survivor would do. Unless a survivor is tea bagging and constantly flash light clicking they aren't being toxic they're just doing what they can to survive. I don't camp, tunnel, or anything I still get 4 k's at rank 2 and I know you may think you aren't camping or tunneling but waiting for a survivor to get unhooked when you can easily run back and kill them is camping as well. It isn't a free unhook if you're good.

    Yeah, your pretty obviously not a killer main or even 50/50 player if you think half this stuff...Until we see Killers posting for people to [BAD WORD] in mass, then claiming killers are the most toxic is not gonna ever be true...

    This was one hell of a bad attempt to even try making yourself sound like an even 50/50 player...

  • The_CrusaderThe_Crusader Member Posts: 3,688
    edited February 3
    Zarathos said:

    Is this bait?
    So where to start
    1. gg ez is the term used by every egocentric players its never one side if your telling me you never met a survivor who also went gg ez then i want your survivours.

    1. Ds kinda promotes killers to hunt other targets that arent carrying it. Which often results in a killer targeting the person off the hook instead of going after the obssesion. If you take a ds regardless of whether or not your behind i question your legitimacy as a killer player. Slugging ds and dribbling is the best solution right now.

    2. Console players are still new to the advanced mechanics a survivour can use to survive. So mechanics like camping and tunneling will not be as important. Camping and tunneling mind you are tools in a killers kit. You dont need em for every game but if players are trying to rush hooks or are making bad saves you need to punish that misplay by downing the unhooked or force them to bodyblock.

    My advice dont ever listen to a killer main or survivour main listen to the players who play both. They will give you the fairest assesment of the game and its problems.

    Number 2 is so true.

    If I see someone rush an unhook and the person unhooking has DS then sorry but I'm going for the injured guy. I'm all for giving people a chance when unhooked but I'm not going to screw myself over by wasting time chasing someone to get no hook out of it.

    Other survivors have to suffer because baby wants his crutch perk. Reason #342 why it's an awful, toxic perk.
  • Jake_Parks_princeJake_Parks_prince Member Posts: 218

    Other survivors have to suffer because baby wants his crutch perk. Reason #342 why it's an awful, toxic perk.

    or you could hear me out...realize its less toxic then NOED and very easy to deal with. Reason #500 why everyone hates us killers.

  • Jake_Parks_princeJake_Parks_prince Member Posts: 218

    @AlexAnarchy said:

    @Jake_Parks_prince said:
    Hi killer main here I'd just like to start off by saying in my 1200 hours of DBD across all 3 platforms the only one which I encountered survivors who were toxic toxic was PS4. Other then on PC i have a solid 300 hours and I've had little to no end game toxicity other then when I play survivor and the killer goes "GG EZ noob team." on my 900 hours on xbox I have received 3 end game anger chats. Thats it. It really isn't survivors being toxic because most things survivors do is well needed to survive the match. Pallet looping, is needed to live, 360's is needed to live sometimes, blinds are meh in needs, DS is a basic perk that I haven't had much problem although that may just be luck, and unhooks and body blocking are just what any altruistic survivor would do. Unless a survivor is tea bagging and constantly flash light clicking they aren't being toxic they're just doing what they can to survive. I don't camp, tunnel, or anything I still get 4 k's at rank 2 and I know you may think you aren't camping or tunneling but waiting for a survivor to get unhooked when you can easily run back and kill them is camping as well. It isn't a free unhook if you're good.

    Yeah, your pretty obviously not a killer main or even 50/50 player if you think half this stuff...Until we see Killers posting for people to [BAD WORD] in mass, then claiming killers are the most toxic is not gonna ever be true...

    This was one hell of a bad attempt to even try making yourself sound like an even 50/50 player...

    Im literally like a 30/70 main?????? Because I have an actual valid opinion im not? lmao okay go off I mean everything I said is true I play killer more now because i've had an easier time playing killer then I ever did as survivor sure i've had challenging games where I got bullied but everyone has thats why I made this post like just get over it killers are more toxic then survivors.

  • se05239se05239 Member Posts: 3,724

    @Orion said:
    Survivors started it, Killers retaliated in kind, now people who don't know history either claim it's Killers or both sides.

    It started with survivors exploiting the true infintes and the hostage taking that followed afterwards.

  • BossBoss Member, Trusted Posts: 7,059

    "My experience is the only truth, anyone saying anything else is wrong because it didn't happen to me so it can't be true."
    You really believe 80% of the lobby isn't toxic?
    You're heavily underestimating this game's toxicity.

  • Rogis_Right_HandRogis_Right_Hand Member Posts: 28

    I don't want to get in a huge argument or anything, but how does body blocking seem fair? To me, that's the most toxic thing there is, especially on hooks.

  • Jake_Parks_princeJake_Parks_prince Member Posts: 218

    @Boss said:
    "My experience is the only truth, anyone saying anything else is wrong because it didn't happen to me so it can't be true."
    You really believe 80% of the lobby isn't toxic?
    You're heavily underestimating this game's toxicity.

    I'm just saying most killers call toxicity way to fast like if a survivor loops them its considered toxic, if a survivor flash light saves its toxic, pallet stuns = toxic hell just doing gens is literally considered toxic! And then the killers get mad and DC or camp or tunnel even if the survivor wasn't truly being toxic.

  • perotxperotx Member Posts: 77

    Both sides can be toxic when they are angry at the game or the players. I know for sure that I had moments of toxicity and saying things that I shouldn't have said while playing either side. It's not just killers and not just survivors, it's everyone. And it's not just in DBD.

  • BossBoss Member, Trusted Posts: 7,059

    @Jake_Parks_prince said:

    @Boss said:
    "My experience is the only truth, anyone saying anything else is wrong because it didn't happen to me so it can't be true."
    You really believe 80% of the lobby isn't toxic?
    You're heavily underestimating this game's toxicity.

    I'm just saying most killers call toxicity way to fast like if a survivor loops them its considered toxic, if a survivor flash light saves its toxic, pallet stuns = toxic hell just doing gens is literally considered toxic! And then the killers get mad and DC or camp or tunnel even if the survivor wasn't truly being toxic.

    I disagree.
    Well, i disagree with you saying most Killers think that way.
    I can't say you're wrong about the Killers you face, maybe you're just unlucky.

    Anyway, i myself rarely encountered a Killer who complains after the match.
    Heck, most Killers i faced almost never spoke post-match.
    Not saying they don't exist, just saying i can't relate to over 50% at least are toxic Killers.

Sign In or Register to comment.