Best Of

Pin this post if u agree

So bleeding the killer of his sanity for 2 minutes of teabagging at the gates is fine then? They value survivors' time, but not the killer's, that was the whole point: symmetrical situation, but different privileges, survivors get to quit the moment they fall on the ground, even if the killer has no intention to slug for 4 minutes, so that dear survivors can skip the mori animation and thus protect their ego, but the killer can't do anything against a bully squad but to obediently endure the humiliation procedure. Survivor sided design, QED.

Can we stop it with the “us vs them” garbage? Making broad, insulting generalization about how “killer mains” feel and how they play is intentionally toxic and divisive. The sole purpose of this post was to rile people up for a fight, and of course it worked. I really wish there was a rule against this kind of stuff where the sole purpose is for someone to troll the side that they don’t play/like.

the problem with your whole argument is you only talk about a solo q perspective, ignoring what how powerfull a communicated team is capable of, not only in gen efficiency, but map control, resource managment, reset timers, body blocks.

but yes, if you play an A or S tier killer the game becomes killer sided, but no because survivors are the weaker role, but because they have a better map control and chase power, time is on their side. this is the most important part of the game, time management, an S tier can just win the chase fast, hook and keep going. the lower tier needs to chase for more time, or can´t go from one side to the map to the other.

the game is not only who has the best mechanical skill, but the one who uses their time more efficient. and 4 survivors is always more efficient than 1 killer

Yeah, SoloQ is rough. I play with 1 friend, but having two randoms is still A LOT of variance. And obviously people play to play in an SWF because then they either are just playing with friends and have fun regardless or they know that the other players are good and know what to do.

Just as an example what happened yesterday:

Me and Ada on a Gen next to Shack on Ormond. Two other Gens nearby, one Gen on the opposite site of the Map. Two Gens to go. Killer (Myers) hooks Nancy, who has Kindred. My SWF-Mate is not far away from the Hook, Ada and myself are full map away. And yet Ada decides to get up and goes for the Unhook, even if my SWF-Mate is nearby. And what happens? I cannot finish the Gen on my own (with Ada together it would have been finished), Myers kicks it with PGTW and never leaves his 3-Gen again. Game was lost, if Ada would have stayed at my Gen, we most likely would have won.

And this is not an issue of information, since Nancy had Kindred. So Ada had full information where everyone was and who should go for the Unhook. This was just a SoloQ-Teammate being bad. And people play SWF to minimize the chances to be paired with those players.

I mean he used to be faster.

He just gets so much for free that other killers have to work tooth and nail for.

Need to cover half the map in a second? Point and click.

Upgrade your power? Point and click.

Injure a survivor? Point and click.

You'd think he then would have a power useless for helping get the second hit, but this is extremely incorrect after learning how to use the dash better. It's like inverting Oni's design philosophy in the worst way possible.

Oni gets nothing when the game starts, but after a few solid hits and downs, he feels overwhelming and unstoppable when his dash and insta down get going. You need to create your opportunities from the limited powers you start with.

Ghoul just gets to inflict injury after injury plus deep wound plus giving him a third leap, to the point where it feels like the game can have started in 20 seconds and a lot of Ghoul players will already be on their second or third injury. He gets opportunity after opportunity until the game says "alright you gotta do the last part bud" in getting the second hit, but it isn't like the game is making him work more for that second hit the same way Oni has to work for his first.

With all due respect, this is quite a terrible take.

Just because someone wants competition to incentive DbD to improve, they aren't obligated to spend their time and money in any bad game that shows up wanting to compete with DbD.

Because most of the atempted competition against DbD over the years has been just that, very bad, buggy, poorly balanced games that were handled terribly by the devs. So of course they didn't get support for long, couldn't hold a playerbase and died, they just weren't worth the time DbD is.

The thing is: asymmetrical online games are very hard to balance, specially with the conflicting feedback coming from different sides. They are often original games that are trying styles of gameplay that weren't tried before, and done by small developers with limited budgets. So things often don't go as planned and they fail. DbD is so far the only asymmetrical game that found the right formula and made it work, and yet it still deals with issues related to its base design. Some other games not only failed to find the right formula, they were also very poorly handled by their devs, who didn't even do the bare minimum. That was what happened with Last Year, Friday the 13th the Game (which was awfully buggy and very poorly balanced, but had that lawsuit as a escapegoat to blame for its failure) and Texas Chainsaw Massacre. The lattest two are from Gun, and I think that says everything that needs to be said about them. To make things worse, their upcoming Halloween game looks like a copy-pasted F13th reflavored in Halloween's scenario. I'm not interested in playing a game with a teleporting Michael Myers who can be stun-locked by survivors exactly like Jason was in F13th.

Because as much as people like to hate on bhvr, compared to all other competition bhvr are doing things good, great even, look at this while people are complaining that bhvr are ruining dbd for the 170th time, they are still working on future updates, bug fixes (they should work more on this btw), licenses, and listening to the community for better or for worse. You know what the competition is doing? Charging 10 dollars for each new character, picking fights on social media with their players, and throwing shade at bhvr for some reason. Like how on earth do you want me to play the competition when every time a major balance issue is happening they just tell you "chill its a party game" like bhvr has it issues, they normally go nuclear with nerfs but at least they listen, they undo questionable updates.

I heavily disagree with this post.

Personally, I love playing all sorts of games in the asymmetrical horror genre. I've played Last Year, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Identity V, Home Sweet Home: Survive, Friday the 13th, VHS, Propnight, RE: Resistance, Evil Dead: The Game, Deceit; to name a few.

The issue in this case is the developer in question. I was super hyped for and really enjoyed The Texas Chainsaw Massacre game, and it's in my top 10 played games on Steam, actually. The developers, however, arbitrarily abandoned it to go and make this new project. They still have all the licensing required to develop new content, they just won't.

It's a concerning pattern from these specific devs, I have lost confidence in GUN Media and I do not want to spend any more of my money on them.

Often with asymms, it'll be a frustrating case of the games themselves being good, but the developers in question making some kind of horrible decision that causes them to die. Basically all of these games I would've loved to stick around for much longer, but that seems to be the way these things often go.

It's honestly some credit to BHVR for not fumbling the bag this hard, as questionable as some of their decisions can be sometimes, since that seems to be a relatively easy thing to do in this market. I think these types of games genuinely are really hard to make well, and keep going on top of that.

Even if there was a exact copy of dbd beat for beat gameplay no one would play it and say “it will die within a year”

Not really true. I play Identity V a bunch from time to time, and it's been going strong since 2018. The core gameplay loop is so similar to DBD that the developers of the game collaborated with them while they were building it.

Granted it's a lot more popular in China specifically compared to Western markets, but I think it still has its gameplay merits, I like how it focuses on each individual Survivor/Hunter having an ability instead of perks (not that I'd want DBD to be that way, I like both of them for what they are).