How long would you wait....

Slashstreetboy

if the DEVs did the right thing and focused all their resources into optimisation and eliminating bugs?

This would of course delay future content. So how many chapters would you be willing to skip for DBD to be reasonably optimised and for the most part free of bugs?

posted in off-topic bc I´m unable to post it in general (talking about bugs^^)

notstarboard

any number of chapters

I don't play this game for new content. I would like the game to reliably work, though, and to run a whole lot better than it does today.

bm33

any number of chapters

I'd love for them to just focus on optimization and bug fixes for a bit.

VolantConch1719

2 chapters

I would love this game to be optimized, but too much time between new content would kill it too fast. I think 6 months would be enough time to get things at a decently fixed state.

Seiko300

any number of chapters

This idea is worthless because it's a loaded question to begin with. "The Right Thing" my ass

SCP_FOR_DBD

2 chapters

Theres tons of problems with the idea that the devs should lay off over half they're staff for 5 months. But playing along with the idea I don't see how it should take more than 2 chapters too help fix the game.

AetherBytes

2 chapters

I'd like to think they could do it if they skipped 1 chapter, but this is BHVR we're talking about.

Boosted_Dwight

1 chapter worth of time should be enough

I think 3+ months is a good enough time to knockout a good amount of bugs. If not 2 chapters but not for too long because if nothing new is added people could get bored. :/

Slashstreetboy

any number of chapters

https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1639528#Comment_1639528

It´s the same for me. Unless it´s an absolutely mindblowing addition, like say Jason, I´d be fine with not getting new content until all the issues of the game were resolved.

dugman

Leading question. How do you know they’re not already “doing the right thing” with their current development strategy? Why would you think that having literally everybody working on bugs is more productive than having one team working on tweaking old content and another team working on developing new content? What’s the art department working on while all the old bugs are being fixed? And how many actual major bugs are we talking about where this would make an impact at all? For instance they probably already have enough people working on fixing the new MMR system, they need time to test it though. And the exploit they need to close for the DC ban to come back up is also probably a high priority but might be difficult to figure out a fix for regardless of how many people are assigned to fixing it.

Slashstreetboy

any number of chapters

https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1640617#Comment_1640617

It doesn´t appear to be that way. Regarding optimisation, for example. The recent update had a huge negative impact on performance. The people on console....how long have they been begging for optimisation? 3 years, 4? So many people are complaining now about rubberbanding,lagspikes and weird movement bugs.

What about the silent survivor bug. It´s still there, just like the hooking bug and DS. How often does dead hard not work properly. Why are there no scratch marks on Ormond? I don´t wanna make this too long though, but DBD suffers from long lasting issues, some of them being prevalent for years(!).

I reckon a lot of people are fed up with what they percieve as slacking by the DEVs regarding game health. I understand that for a company with a product that has it´s own niche without competition, game health is not as sellable as new shiny little cosmetics for example. It´s their job after all and they need to make money from it.

You mention the MMR. Months of preparation only to fail miserably, then months of silence. Needs more testing,right... This isn´t meant in an insulting way, I actually made a pitty post for them when MMR started and crashed to the ground burning.

How long has it been since the DC ban exploit became widepsread? I can´t remember for sure to be fair. Maybe 3 months? Correct me if I´m wrong but if it were around that time or even longer you can´t claim with a straight face that this was a priority for them unless you have very low expectations on their abilities as game developers.

Anyways, if you haven´t guessed it, this was actually meant to be a more lighthearted post to get some opinions on the matter. As of right now the votes seem pretty divided which I find interesting.

Since it was a more fun little thing I wanted to do I hadn´t thought it through to the point where I´d consider the art team. These guys are their Fing MVPS if you ask me, they never fail to impress me.

RepostRiposte

2 chapters

They can let the regular team handle all the little bugs but I'd like to see some more effort go into launching less updates with numerous game-breaking bugs. It's sort of disappointing seeing all these problems from the PTB remain untouched.

dugman

https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1640638#Comment_1640638

Definitely kudos to the art team. Also the music is pretty sweet, generally Behaviour does a solid job on aesthetics. 😄

BassTram

any number of chapters

I would be fine with them just focusing on bugs and optimization without new killers/survivors and chapters but I would at least still like to have new tomes so I can have something to work towards while they're working on it.

Awkward_Fiend

2 chapters

6 months is enough time to optimize the game, also this is enough time to balance out a lot of features such as how grindy teachable perks are

ms300

Not a single one lmao

Honestly dbd is dbd because of its clitches

CalamityJane

1 chapter worth of time should be enough

Depends how they did it.

If it was a whole chapter's wait of JUST bugfixes and optimistisation, that would probably drive me away for a while.

If they also used that time to rebalance and rework old perks as well, then that would give me more incentive to be active during that time.