It can't be endless... so when would you stop?


Sure, it's fun getting new killers and survivors but at some point, they have to stop, right? When would you stop bringing in new killers and especially new survivors. At some point, it seems to me, there's not much point in bringing in more survivors. Agree? Disagree? I'm curious what people think.


  • IlliterateGenocide
    IlliterateGenocide Member Posts: 6,002
    edited July 2021

    if you bring in new killers, you have to bring in new survivors you cant leave one side without content. and im guessing we will have 2-3 more years if were lucky

  • malloymk
    malloymk Member Posts: 1,543

    Same. Game health and maybe a new game mode or two is really what they should be focusing on. If there is a must have licensed killer that becomes available, sure go ahead and take a swing at it. But we don't need any new killers or survivors right now.

    Maybe in a year from now I would change my mind, but at least I could get caught up on the grind a little bit at least.

  • dspaceman20
    dspaceman20 Member Posts: 4,699

    I so want them to do something for the games health but I still want new content.

  • Phasmamain
    Phasmamain Member Posts: 11,531

    Honestly if we get MR hits you ver to pallet number 6 for the next chapter I might take a break for awhile

  • tippy2k2
    tippy2k2 Member Posts: 5,111
    edited July 2021

    Can't Stop Won't Stop!!! *Airhorn Noises*

    I do feel that BHVR at this point might be better off stopping and letting the game rest for a while (if for any other reason, every time they introduce something new, five things seem to break and ten things seem to become really wobbly...). Maybe work on DBD2 and use all the knowledge and experience you've gained over these five years to build a much stronger foundation instead of building on top of a sand dune and becoming shocked when your kitchen collapses into a sinkhole.

    While you can always introduce new killers relatively easy since you can have them have different powers and stuff to do, it feels like they're running out of ways to introduce new survivors. So many perks are basically perks we already have, just slightly different (though Blast Mine is pretty unique so that's one new perk out of the six that I feel like isn't just a slight tweak of a different perk already in existence). Since every survivor is the exact same, just a different skin, there's only so many things you can do with them. Killer perks are running into the same issue but at least with killers, the killer itself is an individual who can be unique or do something special.

    But ultimately, I imagine they won't as long as it is making money. Which I completely understand but it would be nice if they gave the cash cow a rest for a little bit and at least tried to fix her broken leg and that weird giant growth on her back and tried to figure out why the cash cow barks instead of moos...

  • lemonsway
    lemonsway Member Posts: 1,169

    DbD is stuck in 2016/17 in BHVR's Heads that's why there's no major changes to anything.

    They could but they don't understand why they should do that. I don't think it would stagnate, with better coding they are free to try more stuff without risking breaking everything, this alone is enough to keep it going for longer and in better shape. If you tell me that they've already used too manny ideas for DbD and redoing it with new characters or a sequel would be hard, yeah it would wich is why they should have ended DbD in 2019, having Stranger Things as their last Chapter. Saving Silent Hill and now Resident Evil for their sequel or new direction. That would have been a Massive move to get people to play the new game.

  • AgentTalon
    AgentTalon Member Posts: 331

    Hell people play Runescape and WoW for decades so if the content is solid and they prioritize some game health and QOL changes who knows!

  • Nameless
    Nameless Member Posts: 866

    Why would they ever stop when it's profitable to keep going.

  • Sypherpathic
    Sypherpathic Member Posts: 488

    Interesting comments from all.

    It seems to me that there is a limit because it just becomes too much. What if there were 50 on each side? I don't think anyone wants to think about all of the unlocking. With changes to how unlocking or using perks functions, I can see it.

    And of course, there's still content... Maps in particular, new mechanics and there's certainly the possibility of releasing perks without attaching them to an individual. There are already perks that are common to all killers even without teachables and same with survivors.

    At some point, couldn't you introduce a tool that lets you make your own survivor's appearance like a lot of games do?

    I think this is one of those things where there's always a limit. 50 killers? 100 survivors? 250?

    Of course, reality will provide an end point, as some have pointed out, the money will stop coming in, but I think the relative breakneck pace at which they're releasing a relatively insulated type of content will provide a solid limit. It was pointed out that WoW and other games have been releasing content for years (yeah, how many expansions does EQ2 have?). But here, we're JUST talking about characters with relatively limited abilities...

    Anyway, it's interesting and would be interesting to think what they might do to revive the game if they decided that characters were not bringing in the $$$$.

  • Mister_xD
    Mister_xD Member Posts: 7,669

    i would keep going for as long as there is enough demand for it.

    though personally i wouldnt mind if they were to tune it down a bit with the chapters and then add some smaller things inbetween chapters (e.g. a new general perk or a new map for a realm that isnt at the "5 maps per realm" end goal yet) aswell as focussing a bit more on game health.

    how about having a chapter every 6 months (new Killer, new Survivor, new Realm, 6 new Teachable Perks) and a midchapter every 3 months (new map(s) for already existing realm(s), new general Perk(s), gamehealth and balance changes)?

    that way we would still be getting new content every 3 months, but it would be less big of a deal than a whole new chapter - it would allow the Devs to focus more on the actual chapters (to avoid another Twins / Trickster) and get them some more time on their hand for other important things (e.g. gamehealth).

  • AgentTalon
    AgentTalon Member Posts: 331
    edited July 2021

    Honestly, a really easy way to keep going but also not totally screw over new players with 100000 perks to unlock would be to simply find a point in the game's lifecycle, say 6th anniversary, and drop a 1-time purchase item to unlock all perks prior to that point. Not the Chars themselves, those are still purchased as normal but the perks.

    Edit: By 1 time I don't mean limited just a single purchase.

  • Yogerman1997
    Yogerman1997 Member Posts: 374

    i think they should stop making new Original survivors, instead adding their perks as regular perks for everyone.

  • Orion
    Orion Member Posts: 21,675

    Any point after Candyman is fine by me.

  • DwightFairfield
    DwightFairfield Member Posts: 1,246

    I think if they slow down their development cycle they can add better, higher quality survivors, maps, perks and killers.

  • GeneralV
    GeneralV Member Posts: 10,238

    Truth be told, I can live without Spirit and everyone released after her.