The second iteration of 2v8 is now LIVE - find out more information here: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/480-2v8-developer-update
The November Developer Update is now available: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/481-developer-update-november-2024-ptb

What is your definition of "Toxic"

2»

Comments

  • glitchboi
    glitchboi Member Posts: 6,023
    edited October 2021

    Being a jerk in endgame chat, leaving a negative comment on one's profile because they need an ego boost, slugging someone for the rest of the match, abusing game-affecting bugs/exploits to ruin a player's experience, and cheating (obviously).

  • adirgeforthedead
    adirgeforthedead Member Posts: 424

    In my humble opinion, in gaming being toxic is playing in a way that intentionally ruins the gameplay for another player. Some will say face-camping, tunnelling, slugging, teabagging, sandbagging, flashclicking, abusing exploits or bugs amongst others are examples of how one can be toxic to another player in this game and I wouldn't say this is a team vs team, but as Survivor I've dealt with other toxic Survivors who decide to make my games insufferable.

    Then it comes to player interactions in the form of text communications where insults, harassment and threats are thrown back and forth. And, finally, the worse comes to abuse systems for the purpose of doxxing or DDoS other players, which has happened in more than one occasion.

    I think cheating is cheating. Some people may include it as toxic, but I think it should be considered its own crime because most people will consistently disagree with what's toxic or not, but we all can agree that cheating is cheating.

  • Nomadd
    Nomadd Member Posts: 167

    Whether you find flashlight clicking, teabagging and other actions like that as annoying, we can say objectively, that those actions ARE performed to do exactly that - annoy and nothing else. And in my opinion, if you do something with a conscious choice to annoy other player(s), then you ARE toxic.

    And it doesn't matter if it annoys you or not. I don't care for the end game chat for example, doesn't matter if it's something silly like calling me stupid or more serious like death threats. I find it all rather silly and I don't care, it won't trigger me. But objectively, it's not really healthy that a person gets so aggressive over a game.

    Teabagging and other actions like that are like a 'language' between players, it's like a middle finger - somehow, in history, it's been defined as offensive and games do stuff like that as well, define their own 'language' or signs. So whether you find it offensive or amusing it doesn't matter - it's purpose is to annoy you and it's being used in 99% of the time only for that. So I think it should be deemed as toxic.

  • danielmaster87
    danielmaster87 Member Posts: 9,452
    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2545438#Comment_2545438

    Like Franklin's? They can get over it. Their problem is with the perk then, not the killer.

  • danielmaster87
    danielmaster87 Member Posts: 9,452
    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2546362#Comment_2546362

    I've sort of been on their end of that before. We decide not to save the random, not because we have an issue with them, but because the gen finishing time is literally more worth it than saving them. They'd have to really mess up to make us feel that way though, like running straight at the killer when we unhooked them without BT and are trying to block for them. Or if they're doing something stupid like cleansing against Plague when nobody else is, killing us all.