We have temporarily disabled The Houndmaster (Bone Chill Event queue) and Baermar Uraz's Ugly Sweater Cosmetic (all queues) due to issues affecting gameplay.

Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on these and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
The Dead by Daylight team would like your feedback in a Player Satisfaction survey.

We encourage you to be as honest as possible in letting us know how you feel about the game. The information and answers provided are anonymous, not shared with any third-party, and will not be used for purposes other than survey analysis.

Access the survey HERE!

PSA: Debating

StibbityStabbity
StibbityStabbity Member Posts: 1,839
edited November 2020 in General Discussions

These forums are used for players to debate each other quite a bit over things such as game mechanics, balance, who is best boi, and the sexual orientation of fictional characters. All well and good.

THAT SAID, reading through some of those debates is mind numbing at best and soul destroying at worst. I have lost several points in the stat "Faith in Mankind" to some of the awful posts I have seen in debate threads. As such, I thought it might be worthwhile and maybe a bit fun to post some PERSONAL advice on debating. Not just for here, mind you, but anywhere.

  1. Anecdotal Evidence: This is, perhaps, one of the most used and abused things I have seen in any debate on this forum. For those that don't know, this is where you use personal experience as a justification for an argument. It has its uses, even here, and I'm not against using it to gather a consensus. Not at all. What I have against it, however, is when people use anecdotes to justify an argument that simply doesn't work on its own. For example: "I have never seen a Killer eat a DS that wasn't tunneling, therefor, Killers that don't tunnel never eat a DS". That's a really, REALLY bad argument. I could just as easily state I have never seen your parents, so you must not have parents. (I mean, you might not. I don't know you. Just guessing you do, though.) It also completely ignores the fact that even though something is VERY unlikely to happen, it can still happen. There are a lot of expressions about a one in a million chance, but sometimes those one in a million happen. Ignoring something that logically COULD happen because you've never seen it, and then basing your entire argument on never seeing it, is a really REALLY bad look for you. Just don't. You look better in red anyways.
  2. Perspective: So, someone said something you don't agree with. They also gave a reason behind the thing they said that you don't agree with. They provided a PERSPECTIVE via their reasoning to the outcome you disagree with. You have two choices here: Read their reasoning behind their perspective and engage with that, or throw out everything but the fact that you disagree and call them a big dumb poop butt. It's staggering how often than latter option gets used. I merely ask people to give the former a little go. A ride around the block. A chance. C'mon, holds it hands and do a little dance with it. It won't bite, I promise. NOW, this works the other way around as well. You make a case. GOOD JOB. Your case is so narrow in its perspective that almost ANY logic can be used to discount or discredit it. Not good job. When looking at ANY topic of debate, it's a good idea to give yourself a HUGE leg up by considering both or, in some cases, all sides of an argument before engaging in the debate. Maybe you don't care what other people think? That's not wise, but okay. They don't have to care what you think either. Your argument got completely shut down and ignored because you went in with the intent to shut down and ignore theirs. Not good job. Again. I'm not your parents, and I'm not entirely sure they exist, so I can't tell you what to do. Still, might wanna not go in with the absolute intent of ignoring all arguments contrary to yours and instead engage with all sides in order to better support your argument against theirs. FUN FACT: This entire point is why I made this thread. Someone on the forums made a thread that randomly dictated what a Killer should and shouldn't be without considering the enjoyment of the Killer player whatsoever. It, well, it rubbed me the wrong way. A lot. I need a counsellor. Help me.
  3. Cherrypicking: Man, this game is fun, except when its not. Lets talk about that last bit. Something TOTALLY NOT FUN happened. Bummer. This could be a potential issue to debate, though! Ya, those gears are turning now! Hold on, though, there's an issue. That one thing doesn't happen as often as, well, it does. Okay, well, it should still be brought up. People might not take it seriously, though... OH I KNOW! Let's take a minor thing and make it out to be the ONLY THING THAT EVER HAPPENS. All that stuff, that stuff I just typed out, ya. Don't. Yes, you should TOTALLY make arguments about minor things that happen that aren't cool and chill, there is nothing wrong with that. However, it doesn't make your argument stronger to say it's the only thing that ever happens. It makes your argument seem unrealistic, and may actually invalidate your points because of your perceived inability to afford a concern it's proper merit. It's OKAY to admit that you have a concern about something minor or rare. In fact, doing so might show everyone else that you UNDERSTAND the severity of the issue, which makes you come off as more grounded and logical about it. That's a good thing. Or, you know, you can come off as emotional and absurd. Your call, but I warned you. This also goes with statistics, charts, all that good stuff. Facts are great! Don't misrepresent them. Intentionally, anyways. Mistakes happen, we're all human. Except maybe you. Still never seen your parents. Having my doubts now.
  4. STRAWMAN: If STRAWMAN was a Killer in DBD, he'd be the most popular one. Painting the other side of your argument as a single, unflattering personification is PRETTY RUDE MY DUDE, DROP THE TUDE. Ya, there are plenty of people that are Killer or Survivor mains. Comes with the nature of the game. However, what you might not know is that those people are all... different. Unique human beings playing the game in their own ways with their own thoughts and skill sets. Pretty radical. So, when you paint them all as a single being that does everything in their power to make the game bad, you are essentially insulting thousands of people around the world for no reason but your ego or argument. Maybe both. A good way to avoid this issue is to simply NOT do it. So don't :DDD
  5. Appeal to Authority: This one is a bit tricky. When used here, it's more or less the idea that things work as they are for a good reason and arguing against them is bad, wrong, or badwrong. Badong. The Devs, though, they're... human. I know, I don't always believe it either. Never met their parents. This means they make mistakes, or throw out a bad call time to time. Just because a Dev said something, or the game has a feature, doesn't mean it's automatically good and correct. It just means its there. Sure, you can use it as part of a larger reasoning, but it might not be best to use it as your only argument. If someone has an issue with something in the game, they probably have a list of reasons they don't like it. You're setting yourself up to have that list thrown at you, which not only invalidated your argument, but might have also made you look like you don't know much about it in the first place. "NoED is good because it's in the game" isn't going to hold up well against someone that has been critically considering the perk.
  6. Elitism/Brand Loyalty: This one shows up every now and then, and mostly looks like this: "If you don't like thing, then play another game". Yes, making people quit the game is great for the health of the game. Go you. Well done. Everyone now knows you are super-hardcore into this game, and would rather see people leave than voice concern over it. Also, you should seriously get over yourself. Voicing concern, suggesting changes, and having a mindset that IMPROVEMENT IS GOOD is, well, a good thing. Viciously hating on that because you are just so good at and loyal to Video Game™ honestly does nothing but make you look pompous and unreasonable. You're also not engaging with the concern at all, and instead opting to try and invalidate the concern with some kind of perceived supremacy you have. Well, here's a REALLY brutal news flash: You don't have that supremacy. I know. More at 11. To think about this in a more positive manner, though, think of the game as your own child. That means you are a parent, I haven't met you, and you might not exist. Are you proud of what he child has accomplished? Of course! Do you want to see it improve, get better, and succeed? Absolutely. Denying it's problems hinders that growing process, which impacts its ability to succeed. Don't be mindlessly loyal or elitist about the game. Admit its faults, and work towards improvement. Turning a blind eye due to pride or prejudice has lead to some pretty bad situations, historically speaking. So let's not.

There are plenty of other things I could harp on about, but this is already a long post that probably won't get any attention. Also, an improvement in any number of these would be HUGE, so ya. I'm not your parents, so I'm not sure you exist, but that also means you don't have to do a single thing I said here. I hope you do, though. If not for me, for love ❤️. If you made it this far, make sure to subscribe that smash button and like that bell. This thread has been brought to you by RAID SHADOW LEGENDS...

Comments