We have temporarily disabled Baermar Uraz's Ugly Sweater Cosmetic (all queues) due to issues affecting gameplay.

Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on this and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list

Killers No Longer See Time Remaining on the Hook

Kind_Lemon
Kind_Lemon Member Posts: 2,559
edited October 2018 in Feedback and Suggestions

A balance change to reduce choice camping (Edit:aka hard camping, patrolling and/or returning to the hook before survivors rescue the survivor) would be to not let the killer know how much longer the survivor has on the hook before they die. That would mean a greater chance for unpredictability in survivors in situations where the survivors aren't experts at chase, and the killer is dominating the hook game.

Tell me why the community members agree or disagree.

Post edited by Kind_Lemon on

Comments

  • Rebel_Raven
    Rebel_Raven Member Posts: 1,775

    It might backfire and make them camp harder to ensure the kill instead of leave prematurely when the survivor has a little health left.

    Campers usually camp to make sure the person dies, and might leave when the survivor is low on health normally.
    Less chance of that if they have to wait until they can see the sacrifice happen.

  • se05239
    se05239 Member Posts: 3,919

    @Whispers23 said:
    Don't agree. Knowing how much health left is good for noncampers.

    This. Campers gonna camp until the person dies, no matter if he see how much time is left or not. Another suggestion that punishes cool killers.

  • The_Crusader
    The_Crusader Member Posts: 3,688
    edited October 2018
    To stop camping they need to emphasize that more hooks >>> end game kills.

    You already get more points for 8 hooks and 0 kills than 2 hooks and 2 kills.

    Everyone still focuses on that end game score though. They need to display a hook count at the end, and perhaps give the killer a rating like A/B/C/D etc. Obviously 4 kills would net you an A even if it was 4 hooks, but they need to try and get people to go for hooks over kills. I think a lot of newer players dont see it this way because it's all about "dat 4k!!!"

    Also daily rituals don't help. Sometimes people use a killer they don't like just for their daily ritual and they can't be bothered putting effort in with a killer they don't like or have no perks for or experience with so they get lazy and camp.
  • mcNuggets
    mcNuggets Member Posts: 767

    If survivors want camping to be prevented, they shouldnt be able to loop killers lol.

  • DeadByFlashlight
    DeadByFlashlight Member Posts: 1,642

    @Kind_Lemon said:
    A balance change to reduce choice camping would be to not let the killer know how much longer the survivor has on the hook before they die. That would mean a greater chance for unpredictability in survivors in situations where the survivors aren't experts at chase, and the killer is dominating the hook game.

    Tell me why the community members agree or disagree.

    How does this affect camping at all?
    I mean camping literally means that the killer chills next to the survivor until he dies, how does it matter AT ALL whether he sees a timer runing or not?

    The timer is actually only useful for killers that DONT camp. Take that away and you will see probably evne more campers :lol:

  • Kind_Lemon
    Kind_Lemon Member Posts: 2,559
    Wow; cool! There was more disagreement than I thought there was going to be. 

    Here’s a hypothetical example of the proposed measure in action:

    A Leatherface is tightly patrolling around a survivor and wants to make sure that survivor dies. The change doesn’t affect this scenario much because the killer can visually see the time left on the bar and his strategy doesn’t change except for the very end when Leatherface stays a few seconds longer around the hook before he realizes the survivor is dead.

    However, not knowing hook phases for the killer matters more against a Spirit who checks back at the halfway mark and juat before the survivor is dead. Those two times are the optimal times for aurvivors to save because it maximizes the time each survivor spends on a hook. If the survivors insta-save, the spirit can down the injured one and waste about 50 seconds of hook time. If the spirit can make sure the survivors don’t save before the second state, that also gives her about 50 extra seconds. This aspect of the game is more pivotal than people give it credit for. The altruism part of the game is always painful for me, and having killers that don’t optimize in their anti-save capacity makes the game less frustrating. 

    It’s not a nerf to killers who let survivors unhook each other while it makes choice camping require more attention and thought. To me, it seems like a change for a better game.
    What are your counter-examples?

    Note: I would rather saves reduce the time left by 1/3 of the entire bar instead of having the weird 50% stuff there is now, but this would require more work.
  • Kind_Lemon
    Kind_Lemon Member Posts: 2,559
    DeadByFlashlight said:

    @Kind_Lemon said:
    A balance change to reduce choice camping would be to not let the killer know how much longer the survivor has on the hook before they die. That would mean a greater chance for unpredictability in survivors in situations where the survivors aren't experts at chase, and the killer is dominating the hook game.

    Tell me why the community members agree or disagree.

    How does this affect camping at all?
    I mean camping literally means that the killer chills next to the survivor until he dies, how does it matter AT ALL whether he sees a timer runing or not?

    The timer is actually only useful for killers that DONT camp. Take that away and you will see probably evne more campers :lol:

    It affects the optimization of camping, making it harder. A killer can’t just leave when there is a fraction more bar left, looking around for unhookers that might be running in last second; they have to wait until they see the survivor stabbed with spikes. That gives roughly 10 extra seconds at the end of a sacrifice for survivors who aren’t in comms to make up for their inefficiency during that time.
  • DeadByFlashlight
    DeadByFlashlight Member Posts: 1,642

    @Kind_Lemon said:
    DeadByFlashlight said:

    @Kind_Lemon said:

    A balance change to reduce choice camping would be to not let the killer know how much longer the survivor has on the hook before they die. That would mean a greater chance for unpredictability in survivors in situations where the survivors aren't experts at chase, and the killer is dominating the hook game.

    Tell me why the community members agree or disagree.

    How does this affect camping at all?

    I mean camping literally means that the killer chills next to the survivor until he dies, how does it matter AT ALL whether he sees a timer runing or not?

    The timer is actually only useful for killers that DONT camp. Take that away and you will see probably evne more campers :lol:

    It affects the optimization of camping, making it harder. A killer can’t just leave when there is a fraction more bar left, looking around for unhookers that might be running in last second; they have to wait until they see the survivor stabbed with spikes. That gives roughly 10 extra seconds at the end of a sacrifice for survivors who aren’t in comms to make up for their inefficiency during that time.

    I dont think you know what "camping" actually means and I believe you are talking about "patroling" actually.
    A killer that camps doesnt move away from teh hook anyway and doesnt give a ######### about any timer until the survivor is dead^^

  • Kind_Lemon
    Kind_Lemon Member Posts: 2,559
    edited October 2018
    @DeadByFlashlight said:

    @Kind_Lemon said:
    DeadByFlashlight said:

    @Kind_Lemon said:

    A balance change to reduce choice camping would be to not let the killer know how much longer the survivor has on the hook before they die. That would mean a greater chance for unpredictability in survivors in situations where the survivors aren't experts at chase, and the killer is dominating the hook game.

    Tell me why the community members agree or disagree.

    How does this affect camping at all?

    I mean camping literally means that the killer chills next to the survivor until he dies, how does it matter AT ALL whether he sees a timer runing or not?

    The timer is actually only useful for killers that DONT camp. Take that away and you will see probably evne more campers :lol:

    It affects the optimization of camping, making it harder. A killer can’t just leave when there is a fraction more bar left, looking around for unhookers that might be running in last second; they have to wait until they see the survivor stabbed with spikes. That gives roughly 10 extra seconds at the end of a sacrifice for survivors who aren’t in comms to make up for their inefficiency during that time.

    I dont think you know what "camping" actually means and I believe you are talking about "patroling" actually.
    A killer that camps doesnt move away from teh hook anyway and doesnt give a [BAD WORD] about any timer until the survivor is dead^^

    Yes; that would be camping. It is the prevention of a save off a hook through the defensive strategy of standing near the hooked survivor. Most killers will start to leave the hook if the timer is low enough and there is not enough time for a survivor to run in and save. It’s a small change to require more investment, albeit amall, to camping. 

    All I want is for the killer to have less time to catch other survivors if the killer camps.
  • xxaggieboyxx
    xxaggieboyxx Member Posts: 498
    Kind_Lemon said:
    @DeadByFlashlight said:

    @Kind_Lemon said:
    DeadByFlashlight said:

    @Kind_Lemon said:

    A balance change to reduce choice camping would be to not let the killer know how much longer the survivor has on the hook before they die. That would mean a greater chance for unpredictability in survivors in situations where the survivors aren't experts at chase, and the killer is dominating the hook game.

    Tell me why the community members agree or disagree.

    How does this affect camping at all?

    I mean camping literally means that the killer chills next to the survivor until he dies, how does it matter AT ALL whether he sees a timer runing or not?

    The timer is actually only useful for killers that DONT camp. Take that away and you will see probably evne more campers :lol:

    It affects the optimization of camping, making it harder. A killer can’t just leave when there is a fraction more bar left, looking around for unhookers that might be running in last second; they have to wait until they see the survivor stabbed with spikes. That gives roughly 10 extra seconds at the end of a sacrifice for survivors who aren’t in comms to make up for their inefficiency during that time.

    I dont think you know what "camping" actually means and I believe you are talking about "patroling" actually.
    A killer that camps doesnt move away from teh hook anyway and doesnt give a [BAD WORD] about any timer until the survivor is dead^^

    Yes; that would be camping. It is the prevention of a save off a hook through the defensive strategy of standing near the hooked survivor. Most killers will start to leave the hook if the timer is low enough and there is not enough time for a survivor to run in and save. It’s a small change to require more investment, albeit amall, to camping. 

    All I want is for the killer to have less time to catch other survivors if the killer camps.
    Why does everyone cry about camping? You yourself just called it a defensive strategy. If it's a strategy why should the devs even touch it in any way to make it less valid or viable. Even the whole chaser thing is dumb. Honestly with the way this went I would just close the thread if I were you 
  • Kind_Lemon
    Kind_Lemon Member Posts: 2,559

    @xxaggieboyxx said:
    Kind_Lemon said:


    @DeadByFlashlight said:

    @Kind_Lemon said:

    DeadByFlashlight said:

    @Kind_Lemon said:

A balance change to reduce choice camping would be to not let the killer know how much longer the survivor has on the hook before they die. That would mean a greater chance for unpredictability in survivors in situations where the survivors aren't experts at chase, and the killer is dominating the hook game.

Tell me why the community members agree or disagree.



How does this affect camping at all?

I mean camping literally means that the killer chills next to the survivor until he dies, how does it matter AT ALL whether he sees a timer runing or not?

The timer is actually only useful for killers that DONT camp. Take that away and you will see probably evne more campers :lol:

    It affects the optimization of camping, making it harder. A killer can’t just leave when there is a fraction more bar left, looking around for unhookers that might be running in last second; they have to wait until they see the survivor stabbed with spikes. That gives roughly 10 extra seconds at the end of a sacrifice for survivors who aren’t in comms to make up for their inefficiency during that time.

    I dont think you know what "camping" actually means and I believe you are talking about "patroling" actually.

    A killer that camps doesnt move away from teh hook anyway and doesnt give a [BAD WORD] about any timer until the survivor is dead^^

    Yes; that would be camping. It is the prevention of a save off a hook through the defensive strategy of standing near the hooked survivor. Most killers will start to leave the hook if the timer is low enough and there is not enough time for a survivor to run in and save. It’s a small change to require more investment, albeit amall, to camping. 

    All I want is for the killer to have less time to catch other survivors if the killer camps.

    Why does everyone cry about camping? You yourself just called it a defensive strategy. If it's a strategy why should the devs even touch it in any way to make it less valid or viable. Even the whole chaser thing is dumb. Honestly with the way this went I would just close the thread if I were you.

    Idk how to close threads, and anyway—hey! Who are you to tell me what to do? I don't care about camping as long as other survivors don't try and get the survivor off the hook, and they instead get the rest of us out. But this game pushes survivors to be overly altruistic from emblems to bloodpoints to a good experience even. Good killers don't need to know the hooked survivor's status to do well. It's only killers who are less skilled that use the information.

  • DeadByFlashlight
    DeadByFlashlight Member Posts: 1,642

    @Kind_Lemon said:
    @DeadByFlashlight said:

    @Kind_Lemon said:

    DeadByFlashlight said:

    @Kind_Lemon said:

A balance change to reduce choice camping would be to not let the killer know how much longer the survivor has on the hook before they die. That would mean a greater chance for unpredictability in survivors in situations where the survivors aren't experts at chase, and the killer is dominating the hook game.

Tell me why the community members agree or disagree.



How does this affect camping at all?

I mean camping literally means that the killer chills next to the survivor until he dies, how does it matter AT ALL whether he sees a timer runing or not?

The timer is actually only useful for killers that DONT camp. Take that away and you will see probably evne more campers :lol:

    It affects the optimization of camping, making it harder. A killer can’t just leave when there is a fraction more bar left, looking around for unhookers that might be running in last second; they have to wait until they see the survivor stabbed with spikes. That gives roughly 10 extra seconds at the end of a sacrifice for survivors who aren’t in comms to make up for their inefficiency during that time.

    I dont think you know what "camping" actually means and I believe you are talking about "patroling" actually.

    A killer that camps doesnt move away from teh hook anyway and doesnt give a [BAD WORD] about any timer until the survivor is dead^^

    Yes; that would be camping. It is the prevention of a save off a hook through the defensive strategy of standing near the hooked survivor. Most killers will start to leave the hook if the timer is low enough and there is not enough time for a survivor to run in and save. It’s a small change to require more investment, albeit amall, to camping. 

    All I want is for the killer to have less time to catch other survivors if the killer camps.

    You are talking about the 2 seconds the killer leaves earlier from the hook because he knows there is no survivor in sight so there is no save possible?

    Pls dude

  • DeadByFlashlight
    DeadByFlashlight Member Posts: 1,642

    @Kind_Lemon said:

    @xxaggieboyxx said:
    Kind_Lemon said:


    @DeadByFlashlight said:

    @Kind_Lemon said:

    DeadByFlashlight said:

    @Kind_Lemon said:

A balance change to reduce choice camping would be to not let the killer know how much longer the survivor has on the hook before they die. That would mean a greater chance for unpredictability in survivors in situations where the survivors aren't experts at chase, and the killer is dominating the hook game.

Tell me why the community members agree or disagree.



How does this affect camping at all?

I mean camping literally means that the killer chills next to the survivor until he dies, how does it matter AT ALL whether he sees a timer runing or not?

The timer is actually only useful for killers that DONT camp. Take that away and you will see probably evne more campers :lol:

    It affects the optimization of camping, making it harder. A killer can’t just leave when there is a fraction more bar left, looking around for unhookers that might be running in last second; they have to wait until they see the survivor stabbed with spikes. That gives roughly 10 extra seconds at the end of a sacrifice for survivors who aren’t in comms to make up for their inefficiency during that time.

    I dont think you know what "camping" actually means and I believe you are talking about "patroling" actually.

    A killer that camps doesnt move away from teh hook anyway and doesnt give a [BAD WORD] about any timer until the survivor is dead^^

    Yes; that would be camping. It is the prevention of a save off a hook through the defensive strategy of standing near the hooked survivor. Most killers will start to leave the hook if the timer is low enough and there is not enough time for a survivor to run in and save. It’s a small change to require more investment, albeit amall, to camping. 

    All I want is for the killer to have less time to catch other survivors if the killer camps.

    Why does everyone cry about camping? You yourself just called it a defensive strategy. If it's a strategy why should the devs even touch it in any way to make it less valid or viable. Even the whole chaser thing is dumb. Honestly with the way this went I would just close the thread if I were you.

    Idk how to close threads, and anyway—hey! Who are you to tell me what to do? I don't care about camping as long as other survivors don't try and get the survivor off the hook, and they instead get the rest of us out. But this game pushes survivors to be overly altruistic from emblems to bloodpoints to a good experience even. Good killers don't need to know the hooked survivor's status to do well. It's only killers who are less skilled that use the information.

    Who are you to tell killers what to do?

    Those arguments always work for both sides :wink:

  • Kind_Lemon
    Kind_Lemon Member Posts: 2,559

    @DeadByFlashlight said:

    @Kind_Lemon said:
    @DeadByFlashlight said:

    @Kind_Lemon said:

    DeadByFlashlight said:

    @Kind_Lemon said:

A balance change to reduce choice camping would be to not let the killer know how much longer the survivor has on the hook before they die. That would mean a greater chance for unpredictability in survivors in situations where the survivors aren't experts at chase, and the killer is dominating the hook game.

Tell me why the community members agree or disagree.



How does this affect camping at all?

I mean camping literally means that the killer chills next to the survivor until he dies, how does it matter AT ALL whether he sees a timer runing or not?

The timer is actually only useful for killers that DONT camp. Take that away and you will see probably evne more campers :lol:

    It affects the optimization of camping, making it harder. A killer can’t just leave when there is a fraction more bar left, looking around for unhookers that might be running in last second; they have to wait until they see the survivor stabbed with spikes. That gives roughly 10 extra seconds at the end of a sacrifice for survivors who aren’t in comms to make up for their inefficiency during that time.

    I dont think you know what "camping" actually means and I believe you are talking about "patroling" actually.

    A killer that camps doesnt move away from teh hook anyway and doesnt give a [BAD WORD] about any timer until the survivor is dead^^

    Yes; that would be camping. It is the prevention of a save off a hook through the defensive strategy of standing near the hooked survivor. Most killers will start to leave the hook if the timer is low enough and there is not enough time for a survivor to run in and save. It’s a small change to require more investment, albeit amall, to camping. 

    All I want is for the killer to have less time to catch other survivors if the killer camps.

    You are talking about the 2 seconds the killer leaves earlier from the hook because he knows there is no survivor in sight so there is no save possible?

    Pls dude

    Yes, I am. I don't know why everyone's trying so hard to protect that tbh. It's kind of silly to argue against it, and it only makes the survivor experience better, in which I take part, sometimes.

  • DeadByFlashlight
    DeadByFlashlight Member Posts: 1,642

    @Kind_Lemon said:

    @DeadByFlashlight said:

    @Kind_Lemon said:
    @DeadByFlashlight said:

    @Kind_Lemon said:

    DeadByFlashlight said:

    @Kind_Lemon said:

A balance change to reduce choice camping would be to not let the killer know how much longer the survivor has on the hook before they die. That would mean a greater chance for unpredictability in survivors in situations where the survivors aren't experts at chase, and the killer is dominating the hook game.

Tell me why the community members agree or disagree.



How does this affect camping at all?

I mean camping literally means that the killer chills next to the survivor until he dies, how does it matter AT ALL whether he sees a timer runing or not?

The timer is actually only useful for killers that DONT camp. Take that away and you will see probably evne more campers :lol:

    It affects the optimization of camping, making it harder. A killer can’t just leave when there is a fraction more bar left, looking around for unhookers that might be running in last second; they have to wait until they see the survivor stabbed with spikes. That gives roughly 10 extra seconds at the end of a sacrifice for survivors who aren’t in comms to make up for their inefficiency during that time.

    I dont think you know what "camping" actually means and I believe you are talking about "patroling" actually.

    A killer that camps doesnt move away from teh hook anyway and doesnt give a [BAD WORD] about any timer until the survivor is dead^^

    Yes; that would be camping. It is the prevention of a save off a hook through the defensive strategy of standing near the hooked survivor. Most killers will start to leave the hook if the timer is low enough and there is not enough time for a survivor to run in and save. It’s a small change to require more investment, albeit amall, to camping. 

    All I want is for the killer to have less time to catch other survivors if the killer camps.

    You are talking about the 2 seconds the killer leaves earlier from the hook because he knows there is no survivor in sight so there is no save possible?

    Pls dude

    Yes, I am. I don't know why everyone's trying so hard to protect that tbh. It's kind of silly to argue against it, and it only makes the survivor experience better, in which I take part, sometimes.

    Because your suggestion hurts those killers who like to move away from the hook. For those killers its useful to know in which hook stage the survivor is.

    A camping killer doesnt care because he camps anyway.

  • Kind_Lemon
    Kind_Lemon Member Posts: 2,559

    @DeadByFlashlight said:

    Because your suggestion hurts those killers who like to move away from the hook. For those killers its useful to know in which hook stage the survivor is.

    A camping killer doesn't care because he camps anyway.

    Alright, then. You seem to be saying it's difficult to know what stage the survivor is in while on the hook. Why not instead of discrediting my idea completely, suggest something like a range for not knowing? Even an indicator on the hook icon that lets the killer know if the survivor is in struggle or attempt escape phase is something you could say.

  • DeadByFlashlight
    DeadByFlashlight Member Posts: 1,642

    @Kind_Lemon said:

    @DeadByFlashlight said:

    Because your suggestion hurts those killers who like to move away from the hook. For those killers its useful to know in which hook stage the survivor is.

    A camping killer doesn't care because he camps anyway.

    Alright, then. You seem to be saying it's difficult to know what stage the survivor is in while on the hook. Why not instead of discrediting my idea completely, suggest something like a range for not knowing? Even an indicator on the hook icon that lets the killer know if the survivor is in struggle or attempt escape phase is something you could say.

    I dont think you understand.

    As a non-camping killer you walk away from the hook to check gens or chase another survivor you already saw. Either your victim gets unhooked immediately (turn back and "tunnel") or you move away further from the hook.

    Now its essential to know when the survivor will enter the next stage because you want to come back to the hook shortly before he is hiting next stage. This is when most survivor come in for a last second "stage" save.

    A killer that camps will go afk in front of the hooked survivor, probably even stand up and get some snacks. Then he will chill until he dies and then walks away, probably even with a few seconds delay after he pushed his snacks to the side and chases down his next camping target.

    Your idea punishes the non-camping killer instead of the camping killer

  • Kind_Lemon
    Kind_Lemon Member Posts: 2,559

    @DeadByFlashlight said:
    A killer that camps will go afk in front of the hooked survivor, probably even stand up and get some snacks. Then he will chill until he dies and then walks away, probably even with a few seconds delay after he pushed his snacks to the side and chases down his next camping target.

    Your idea punishes the non-camping killer instead of the camping killer

    I play hag mostly, and I find that I'm back at the hook in no time once someone is rescued (bc of popped traps). I personally do not care how much time the survivor has lost on the hook, and I feel decidedly mean when I come back just before the halfway mark. If I camp, however, I know I can leave the hook a good 10 seconds before the survivor is dead because I can make sure no one saves them. I've played in a style I do not like as a survivor, and I wanted to propose a change to that. The same applies for Nurses, Huntresses, and Billies. Wraiths, Leatherfaces, Trappers and Michaels have to wait slightly longer before giving the hook distance if they were camping. Spirit might be there or not, so she's a different story. Freddy is not worth talking about. I want to minimize the ability of killers to hunt down other survivors after camping a survivor to death. Seconds are huge, and for a team of randoms who may or may not know what is going on, this is boost. Kindred's Tier 3 range is not super effective in highlighting tightly patrolling killers, and a limit prevents Open Handed from doing wonders on that perk. This was a suggestion that I thought would have more of a mix of positive and negative remarks. It appears that this was not the case.

  • kyuu
    kyuu Member Posts: 32
    Condorloco_26 said:

    If you're planning on not lett9ing the killer know how much time is left, I would say neither should the rest of the survivors. Only the hooked guy should know how much time remains, the rest of the crew should only know in which Hook Stage said guy is.

    SWF would kill that tho
  • DisturbedZ
    DisturbedZ Member Posts: 59

    @mcNuggets said:
    If survivors want camping to be prevented, they shouldnt be able to loop killers lol.

    Do you really think this would help? I have seen matches where the survivors suck and almost instantly got caught every chase and the killer still camped. To me it would seem like rewarding the killer for leaving the hook with points per x amount of distance would be a better idea to discourage camping.

  • mcNuggets
    mcNuggets Member Posts: 767

    @DisturbedZ said:

    @mcNuggets said:
    If survivors want camping to be prevented, they shouldnt be able to loop killers lol.

    Do you really think this would help? I have seen matches where the survivors suck and almost instantly got caught every chase and the killer still camped. To me it would seem like rewarding the killer for leaving the hook with points per x amount of distance would be a better idea to discourage camping.

    Or balance the game for the killer, so killers aren't ######### anymore and don't need to camp?

  • DeadByFlashlight
    DeadByFlashlight Member Posts: 1,642
    edited October 2018

    @DisturbedZ said:

    @mcNuggets said:
    If survivors want camping to be prevented, they shouldnt be able to loop killers lol.

    Do you really think this would help? I have seen matches where the survivors suck and almost instantly got caught every chase and the killer still camped. To me it would seem like rewarding the killer for leaving the hook with points per x amount of distance would be a better idea to discourage camping.

    When all survivors go down isntantly, there is literally no reason to camp and almsot no killers do that. Instead they simply collect the easy 4k and continue instead of waiting 2 minutes afk in front of an easy target that you can down within a few seconds anyway.

    However, what I can imagine is that killers camp the bad player of a SWF because they were not able to catch the good high rank looper. For some reason SWFs can play against low rank killers, no idea why this is still a thing