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
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!
Dbd is unique in that it enables and promotes toxicity
Any other game I've ever seen or played that has the mechanics or communication to be toxic to other players has always had some sort of repercussions if it was taken too far, not dead by daylight though where the player base is essentially coaxed into being toxic to each other in both roles. This is enabled and promoted by the developers by the lack of any punishments dealt to perpetrators of such behavior. I've never seen someone actually banned from violating the "rules," whether that being through toxic gameplay or hate speech. By the devs doing nothing against in the face of these issues they are announcing that it's acceptable behavior which further promotes it to run rampant throughout the community.
Solo que is nothing but killers griefing players who have no answers to it because of the lack of skill and game knowledge to mount a defense so they are completely taken advantage of as the killers intentionally queing up with this mindset get some sick sense of satisfaction that they are ruining these players games.
Then you have survivors who manage to acquire the skill to compete with killers having the option to be toxic themselves and get away with it, commonly seen in swf's who take full advantage of the survivor sided aspect of the game. Now you have killers that are at the mercy of survivors who through sheer numbers and coordination completely change the face of the game to their favor.
It's entirely common to see both roles speaking to each other disrespectfully in the post game chat as this is the only real outlet and sense of justice in the game when reports result in no actions taken. Why wouldn't players grief others when they can get away with it scott free?
I really don't know what goes on behind the scenes that motivates the devs to allow their game to remain in its current state but as a player it's very demoralizing to play and discouraging to even load up anymore. To que up I essentially have to go in with the attitude of expecting toxicity from either side and adjust my loadout and playstyle accordingly. I feel that this betrays the spirit of the game and is truly a tragedy for a game as fun and innovative as dbd.
Comments
-
I get the impression you have EXTREMELY broad and loose definitions of the words "toxic", "griefing", and "ruin".
23 -
I don't think killing as a Killer or escaping as a Survivor is toxic, even if the Killer camped/tunneled/slugged or if the Survivors were playing in a SWF
3 -
Care to elaborate? I feel like every one of those terms applies to dbd, the sheer number of threads on this forum and their general content seems to reflect that.
1 -
Let us just get the first one right off the table:
Any in-game mechanic, tactic, perk, item, add-on, or feature that directly advanced your objective through injuring, downing, hooking, completing a generator, working on a totem, or opening an exit game is not toxic, griefling, or ruining.
3 -
I honestly feel that the word "toxicity" has lost it's meaning completely. Pretty much the only toxic thing is insults/slurs in the after game chat.
Camping/tunnelling/tbagging/flashlight clicking is not toxic...these are things in the game.
And whilst you don't believe people are banned, if you saw how many messages that moderators get, and how many posts we have to delete due to people trying to appeal or complain about their game ban publicly, you wouldn't say that. Hate speech is bannable - they are temporary bans that do not show on their profiles (referring to Steam profiles here), consoles have their own methods for dealing with hate speech, as there's no in-game chat for these platforms. We do allow a certain amount of "smack talk" which is inevitable in only games, things like "gg ez" "baby killer" "noob" "learn to play" as well as swear words are not bannable, these are part of online multiplayer games (and yes people do report these type of comments).
30 -
Right now what is considered toxic is tabbing CTRL and flashlights clicks. Provoking their opponent for attention.
The thing is, these things are an integral part of the game and the developers can do nothing about it unless they are going to change the way the flashlights work.
The chat is the most offensive and perhaps unnecessary because it encourages players to speak their mind in a negative way.
In any game, the players find something with which they can "have fun", "annoy" or show "I'm cool".
It can be from using emote immediately after getting a kill / jumping around/ keeping on shooting after a victory etc.
Players can find such behavior toxic as well. I guess the players in DBD were also looking for something similar to mess around with.
The fact that they are with 3 more people in front of a single player encourages them to annoy and bully, they find it fun more than the actual gameplay.
The chase is the fun part and they are taking it far.
When players come up with toxicity in the first place it is not the problem of the developers but the mentality of those players, these people need to work on themselves.
I wonder how the game would be without being able to crouch and use a flashlight. Will the game will stay toxic as it was before?
0 -
I dont think it's possible to convince people of this because then someone will just yell subjective and another will find another fifty words to say toxic.
Add in the frequency tunneling/camping/swf can be translated to "I lost and can't handle it, you must have played toxic" and every single one of these threads go the same way. As the ever increasing escalation hyperbole continues.
1 -
You're right it is a reportable offense, that doesn't mean that those reports are actually enforced which is the biggest issue of the game. No one gets banned, not even cheaters from the looks of it, or at least they are able to come back repeatedly which would then be a failed anti cheat which in itself creates a toxic environment.
How does a chat filter stop players from being toxic to each other? Does blurring out bad words somehow prevent someone from speaking to another in a hateful manner? If that was the case then I guess the issue is resolved and hate speech no longer exists in the game! They promote toxicity by simply not taking action against players that are clearly enacting that kind of behavior in the game whether through gameplay or speech. If you're high school didn't take action against a bully that directed hate speech to victims wouldn't that be promoting toxicity? Of course it would.
Camping and tunneling absolutely can be toxic is that a joke? Just because camping and tunneling are sometimes the correct course of action doesn't mean that it automatically makes it just at all times. Let's give a pass to the face camping basement Bubba because tournament killers tunnel to win, completely relatable right? Wrong, it's not a black and white issue it's all dependent on the matter in which it is done.
Turning off the chat doesn't change the fact that players speak to each other in unacceptable ways. With that logic just stop getting punked by the jock at school, don't deal with the core issue just tune it out. A truly lazy train of thought on the matter. Pretty unreasonable to expect players to preemptively turn off the only form of communication in the game (pc players only btw) instead of expecting the developers to moderate their game and take
Not sure where you got the pre conceived notion that my enjoyment comes from winning as I failed to include that in my post at all.
0 -
" Pretty much the only toxic thing is insults/slurs in the after game chat."
Coming from someone with pretty thick skin who rarely ever gets bothered by these actions, I disagree with that statement. Something toxic is something done for the sole or majority purpose of insulting or degrading another player with little to no gameplay benefit.
"Camping/tunnelling/tbagging/flashlight clicking is not toxic...these are things in the game."
Camping and tunneling yeah those aren't toxic, tbagging and flashlight clicking are. Camping and tunneling are actual strategies employed to try and gain an advantage and while can be done out of malicious intent, aren't necessarily nor majorly done for that purpose. T-bagging actually is a disadvantage as you waste time in one spot, and flashlight clicking slows you down, both are just done to annoy the other side or rub something in their face ala "hahaha look I'm at the other side of this pallet and you can't hit me" or "hahaha look we all escaped". As you have already seen in another thread, flashlight clicking can also have negative effects on certain peoples health.
Anyone saying they click to "gain the killers attention" is most likely being disingenuous as the grand majority of the time its done its at the same points they would T-bag and they already have the killers attention. There's also easy alternatives such as body blocking that actually put the survivor in a position to gain a significant advantage, not just be annoying..
"We do allow a certain amount of "smack talk" which is inevitable in only games"
Honestly this one I kind of understand, however:
Maybe you should allow a little less? You have a chat filter that filters out much more mundane things, I don't see why you can't add in "ez" and "baby killer" which are insults which you listed as toxic in your first line. As people in charge of the game and its chat, you are in charge of how the players interact with each other as well to a certain degree, if you allow these things then by your own admission you are allowing toxicity.
I'm not saying ban them off the bat or outright, but if you have a consistent repeat offender, you should at the least give them a warning and if they don't improve chat ban/restrict them as they are overly contributing to the hostility in the game. Its not so much "they said this thing" its "they said this thing over and over again to multiple people and are being more a negative influence on the games community and their interactions rather than positive."
Other online games do this, so that's not really an excuse.
Post edited by MrPenguin on12 -
I'm not sure why you're saying that those "things in the game," are not toxic when they are the most commonly referred to actions associated with toxicity in this game. Face camping at five gens, tunneling the same player back to back when objectives are being lost, teabagging killers when the game is won already, and flashlight clicking just in general are definitely toxic behavior without question.
I'll admit that I don't see the messages that moderators get regarding game bans as I'm not in a position to do that so that is promising to hear but I must say that I see plenty of players that should receive bans walk away with no repercussions only to repeat the same behavior again which of course might result in a ban later possibly but the damage has been done and the question remains how many times can these players harass others before justice is served?
I'm glad to hear that hate speech is bannable and enforced, again I have no way of seeing such enforcement and haven't seen mention of it in forums. I understand that smack talk is not bannable and don't expect it to be I was more focusing on the fact that it's a part of the game and contributes to the overall toxicity of this game specifically. To my understanding actions such as holding the game hostage for example are bannable yet from what I've seen on that particular offense it is rarely if ever enforced which I would assume is due to the difficulty in proving it happened and the lack of resources dedicated to enforcing such a multitude of offenses.
3 -
Holding the game hostage is bannable - and we do acts on reports of killers holding survivors hostage in corners for example.
3 -
in·te·gral
/ˈin(t)əɡrəl,inˈteɡrəl/
adjective
adjective: integral
1.
necessary to make a whole complete; essential or fundamental.
Yeah, that does not describe teabagging and flashlight clicking AT ALL. You might wanna find a different word there.
7 -
Well going by that logic then nothing in the game is toxic. Bubba face camping in basement at five gens is directly advancing his objective by making sure that survivor dies so that's not toxic. Tunneling a survivor off hook because they have ttv in their name and looped you too long as you pass a survivor cleansing your hex and another about to pop a gen because you just gotta have them out of the match, not toxic. Bully squad of survivors not touching gens but instead locker stunning with head on while tag teaming each other and getting double locker flashlight saves a the match hits 45 minutes?
I mean come on you just gave a blanket statement saying that anything in the game basically isn't toxic as long as it's achieving an objective can't be done with ill intent. I'm sorry but you've got to be either trolling or delusional.
0 -
Yes I agree that tea bagging and flashlight clicking are toxic while also being unbannable and simply part of the game. Holding the game hostage on the other hand is bannable yet I know multiple offenders that were never disciplined. Face camping at five gens or tunneling with ill intent are toxic but again not bannable which would go in the category of the devs "enabling," toxic behavior.
Having cheaters in the game show up repeatedly would be promoting toxicity because they fail to successfully and completely deal with a game breaking issue which would be evident by cheaters still be active in matches using the same cheats, this isn't to say those cheaters aren't banned but they definitely have methods of returning.
Good point about the toxicity of the game being founded by the players that is certainly true and due to the asymmetrical nature of the game leads to the current state of it where both roles seem to be at each others necks throughout its history.
On the topic of players always finding ways to intentionally get a rise out of others in most games I would say that the devs could realistically and easily add features to the game to discourage or eliminate a lot of these notoriously toxic behaviors. There should be something in the game that prevents, or makes it much less appealing, a killer from face camping at five gens, I will give them credit because iirc the devs did implement a pause on the hook timer if a survivor was close enough (Steve Harrington's Camaraderie perk aka Kinship now) but it was abused by survivors who were able to pause the timer indefinitely. One of the most popular suggestions is to simply add base kit Kindred which would almost single handedly resolve a lot of the glaring issues in solo que by giving players information that would prevent them from being the victims of toxic gameplay as a player would react differently if they saw a bubba standing still in basement.
That of course is a very delicate issue to balance as you can't increase swf's already dominate strength which the kindred addition would solve for example. Essentially the game is the way it is because the design of it is determined to be adequate which results in the overall general consensus seen across every forum, the game is toxic.
0 -
And some people think the Earth is flat, that doesn't make it scientifically correct.
0 -
English is not my native language. I meant to say that crouching and flashlights cannot be deleted from the game because toxicity.
1 -
Glad to hear that actions like that are being enforced. I suppose my initial post is more on the lamenting of the attitudes and atmosphere that dbd has created and wanted to focus more on things that could be implemented into the game to discourage or eliminate them. Most of the responses to this thread seem to be denying that commonly associated toxic behavior is even toxic or that toxicity doesn't even exist in the game at all which I find completely false and am shocked I even have to argue is a thing.
I think a quick look at the front page of the general discussion section says it all, a community of players that are unhappy with the current state of the game for the same common reasons. That's pretty much the large majority of the posts I see here and most other related forums which I think is evidence enough to show that there's a underlying problem which is what motivated me to make this post.
Gotta give credit to everyone that's behind the game though because at the end of the day it is a popular game for a reason and a lot of things are being updated not only for content but balance wise as well, aka dead hard, hit validation, etc.
0 -
Your Daily Philosopher says:
I think "toxicity" and "morality" are two horns of the same goat. Definitions exist for both, and they are claimed to be universally valid. Subjectively, these, as well as other subjective interpretations of the words may be correct. For others, such an interpretation is at most tenable, if not wrong and rarely right, unless it fits well at that moment.
O Lord! Please don't let me make #########!
Amen!
0 -
I think it's fair to say that it's impossible to enforce all bannable offenses even with evidence simply due to lack of resources though I know bans are in fact being issued. I know this for a fact because I've submitted video evidence of a game being held hostage by a streamer then proceeded to see them continue to stream the game for an extended period of time without repercussions, it's just not reasonable to think that every report is a guaranteed ban even if it warrants it.
When I said promotion I meant it in a way that shows they are unwilling or incapable of dealing with, hackers is the first example I think of because they obviously are a toxic addition to any game and are dealt with in wildy varying manners ranging from insta banning them mid game and having an anti cheat that prevents those same cheats from returning to having hackers with the same cheats showing up again and again which I would classify dbd under. That is naturally a fault of the developers who fail to incorporate an anti cheat that can successfully deal with these hackers entirely and the player base suffers for it so in essence they are promoting that they don't have the capabilities to deal with said cheating. I don't know why they can't get an anti cheat that works but I just know that they don't, ironically I just saw a top 5 streamer get toyed with by a hacker last month. The thing is that some games DO have effective anti cheats, take Fortnite for example, I can't remember the last time I saw a hacker in that game.
Camping and tunneling to the detriment of the killer is what I consider to be toxic, I realize and understand that killers have to enact those strategies to win in many situations which could be considered a failure of the games design and could be improved upon, base kit Kindred for survivors for example in solo que. At high level play I'm not sure how they would change the games design so that tunneling the same survivor three times in a row wasn't the optimal strategy.
Turning off the chat is a band aid fix to an underlying issue and is unreasonable to expect players to do preemptively to avoid toxicity at all. No ones saying that verbal violence online is the exact same as physical violence that's simply a comparison and I definitely disagree that they are not at all similar, that's a dangerous statement to make when cyber bullying is well known to be a root cause of suicide.
1 -
So this post here largely reflects why these threads are not taken seriously.
If you are opposed to people behaving negatively then why would you respond this way. There are only two outcomes you can legitimately say you could have expected.
1) To shame them into silence so they'll stop disagreeing with you.
2) To antagonize them into starting a fight.
Which looks awfully hypocritical. Which happens in all of these pointless threads. The people who claim to oppose rude and or toxic behaviour quickly begin to use passive aggressiveness and or direct hostility to silence anyone who disagrees in a civil fashion or antagonize them into acting in a way similar to themselves. As well of course actively antagonizing already irritated people in the hopes of making them angrier.
Almost like these posts are heavily started and supported by people who would qualify as toxic themselves if they weren't the ones deciding what is and isn't toxic.
Which in itself is another common theme in these threads. Disagree with what is or isn't toxic, rude, or degrading will almost always result in immediate hostility. Once again, really making it seem like the point of the post has more to do with your own ego.
3 -
I really can't understand BHVR's indifference to this. Camping and tunneling are one thing, because they're strategies that can be necessary for a situation in the game (though I would also argue there are killers that use these actions for the purpose of griefing, and aren't shy about the fact that they're trying to stop survivors from having fun - it's just that you can't really stop them without stopping legitimate uses of the tactics, so it's a tougher issue.) Tbagging and clicking, though? There's no point to it. It's purely to be obnoxious, even the 'strategic' uses of it bank on people finding it obnoxious, and it's gotten so ingrained in this community that it's become an expected behavior. So much of the negative feeling in this community and the outright resentment between both sides stems from extraneous behavior done to mock or troll. You say trash talking is okay, but is it really okay when you encounter it every other game (as killer, anyway; I find killers tend to be more quiet opponents than survivors)? Because that signals to me that something's wrong.
Defending it - what good does it actually bring to Dead By Daylight? I'm not saying we should mechanically remove tbags and flashlights, or make GGEZ a permaban, but I don't think leaving the community in this position where this behavior is baked-in, expected, and preemptively punished by angry players is healthy for the game. Some means of admonishing excessive amounts of bad behavior, or rewarding players who are perceived as good sports, could go a long way to cleaning the place up.
Also, the game's definition of 'holding hostage' doesn't really extend to all situations a griefing survivor team or killer can do, because the rules are fine with it as long as the game ends eventually. You can have a SWF that completely outclasses their killer and won't complete the final generator until they've had their fill of dunking on the killer, which lasts basically until the SWF gets bored or the killer gives up and stands in a corner (which can lead to hour+ long games.) Or you can have a killer that takes the last survivor, brings them to a deadzone, and makes them wiggle off so they can down them and pick them up again (and bring them back to the deadzone.) This can go on for as long as it takes the bleedout timer to commence, which is long when they're only on the ground for a few seconds each time. But the survivor theoretically has a chance of reaching the hatch, so it's not hostage taking.
10 -
As you can tell, I'm quite passionate about this issue (hence the prison bars).
I must disagree with you here.
'GG EZ' and postgame abuse is the sort of thing that other players may be straight up driven away by. Even in other highly competitive games (LoL, HoTS, Starcraft 2 etc.) once someone starts berating another player, it becomes something worth discouraging via a warning or a time/chat ban. I remember the days of the LoL tribunal, and if I recall correctly - something like 4/5 toxic players reformed after a simple warning.
Clicking wouldn't be so bad if the strobing effect didn't wreck me after a while, and my photosensitivity issues are pretty minor. Mostly, flashing lights are fine - but it's the speed and repetition of the strobe of certain macros that are difficult.
I also think that it's incorrect to compare camping and tunneling (which are cheesy gameplay styles) with teabagging and strobing (which are done purely to be nasty).
I wouldn't want to see anyone banned for teabagging - but I do think that flashlight macros may need a look (as they can actually aggravate photosensitivity conditions) and that a system to incentivize good sportsmanship may not be a bad idea.
At the end of the day, you get the community you create - and a good community draws players in who may otherwise not have stuck around. Final Fantasy versus WoW is a perfect example.
I had a team a few weeks ago that refused to attempt to complete the final gen and just stealthed around the map - they'd given me a pretty decent 3gen and were sulking. They were very clever in avoiding AFK crows and I gave up after 45 minutes. They must have been having fun.
Another team 99%'d the final gen and then spent 30 minutes memeing on me with a pair of sabos, flashlights and bodyblocking. It was impossible to hook. Eventually I was forced to AFK, and in postgame they informed me that this wasn't 'holding the game hostage' as technically it was still possible for me to eventually win - but I could be banned for 'non participation'. I also vaguely recall reading something to this effect on the forums a long time ago - although I may be mistaken and it was Reddit or something.
4 -
@Laluzi I agree that most t-bagging is probably toxic, but you correctly call out the strategic use cases where it can be a tactic to try to pull off a tunneling killer from a survivor (same for clicking). Sometimes it does need to happen. For example, I looped a killer for a long time and they chose to stay with me - didn't t-bag at all. But after 2 hooks he kept coming for me. The team really went all out to try to distract him, and in that situation I think it's fair game.
But intense t-bagging and flashlight clicking, let's say after getting a stun at the start of a game, is simply meant to annoy, and fits the definition of toxicity.
This is why I've generally said that it's not possible for the killer to be toxic, except for possibly some excess hook swings (which in reality doesn't imply much meaning, but whatever).
1 -
Merriam Webster has one of the meanings of toxic being ' extremely harsh, malicious or harmful eg toxic sarcasm. ' If a player is doing something to deliberately ruin the fun for another player then I would argue that falls within that definition.
While a lot of it can't be banned, BHVR seems to be doing the video game equivalent of 'boys will be boys' instead. That's also detrimental to the game as it's pretty obvious the in-game toxicity has hurt player retention for DbD.
While a lot of it can't be banned, it can definitely be discouraged which BHVR does not appear to be doing. If BHVR is serious about caring that all of its players are having fun even stating BHVR disapproves of players attempting to ruin the fun of other players would help more than the current apathetic attitude that, intentionally or not, BHVR is currently displaying to its player base.
2 -
The killer equivalent:
- Repeatedly hitting a survivor on the hook, in excess of one hit to stop the 'scream'.
- Slugging the last survivors and letting them bleed out, rather than hooking.
5 -
" Sometimes it does need to happen."
No it doesn't, they can body block and scratch mark trade out of LOS. Things that would actually directly help instead of trying to be annoying.
"Anyone saying they click to "gain the killers attention" is most likely being disingenuous as the grand majority of the time its done its at the same points they would T-bag and they already have the killers attention. There's also easy alternatives such as body blocking that actually put the survivor in a position to gain a significant advantage, not just be annoying."
3 -
It kind of depends. The situation you described is the only situation I'll ever tbag the killer, and even then the times I've done it have been limited to after the killer already downed the player I wanted to protect (because otherwise I'd rather try to get in the way), but at the same time, you'll get players that follow the killer around constantly clicking and tbagging because "they want to draw aggro", which is true and they're usually good loopers who can buy a lot of time for their team if it works, but it's also on the overly provocative side. I also find those particular players are likely to BM in chat/gates anyway, so I'm a bit 50/50 on strategic BM as a whole; I 100% understand trying to protect a vulnerable teammate, but I suspect a lot of the players who say they tbag for strategic reasons really do it for both reasons and then duck behind the acceptable one as a shield.
As for killer BM; hitting on hook more than once, nodding at a hooked player while facecamping them, or bleeding out without a gameplay reason (DS, Power Struggle, advanced wiggle progress, hook dead zone.) That said, most killer BM is determined in endgame chat because it's hard to tell intent - the killer who hard camps and tunnels a player and then goes "GGEZ lol its ur fault for going down git gud scrub" is toxic, but one who doesn't say anything or just says "GG" is just a normal player doing normal player things.
3 -
It's just disappointing the players accpet something and think it's fine from their view.
Then ignore others not thinking same like them.
Tbag and clciking is fine so is it okay killers slug survivors till they die without hooking?
These can be bad examples to compare but "this is fine that is bad" is kinda hypocritical.
3 -
I don't always agree with Mandy but I do think too many people have gotten soft. I've slummed through League all chat and played in public Halo lobbies. You want toxic, go there. You won't come back here and complain that clicky clicky is anything but a good natured "have at thee!"
1 -
What about Macro on the flashlight it actually serves no purpose but to be annoying to the killer. I also feel like slugging someone and then just leaving them to bleed out its also toxic.
0 -
I'm not really a fan of the argument that "it doesn't bother me, so it shouldn't bother you either", nor "other things are worse than this, so this is fine." Issues existing in other communities doesn't mean we can't improve ours, considering that there are others that are better than DBD's and it's not an impossibility, and "I don't have an issue with this, therefore it isn't a problem and it's the people who don't like it need to get over it" has stood nipping at the heels of every form of social improvement that has ever existed. Like, if it doesn't bug you, that's genuinely great for you, but what's wrong with the fact that it's not the same for everyone else? I don't see what ambivalent people lose by making the game friendlier and less detrimental to people who don't want to constantly deal with hostile behavior. It should only an issue to the people who want to misbehave and routinely piss people off with the way they act, right?
Like, when you load into a match as a survivor, would you rather play against a killer that's enjoying the game, or a killer that's pissed off and ready to take out their frustration from the last game's batch of survivors on you? As killer, would you rather play against some survivors looking to have fun, or some survivors that are trying to make your game as miserable as possible because they think it's funny (and because they've justified that you deserve it somehow?) This is the kind of thing that stands to universally improve if this place had an attitude glow-up.
Seriously, it's standout to me that everyone in the DBD community hates each other. It's more than just a balance thing, it's very frequently a personal vendetta against "the other side" and the people who identify with the other tribe. That is not a healthy environment and it signals something has gone wrong along the way.
11 -
"not toxic" - BHVR.
12 -
More childish and immature than toxic.
Next time just ignore them. As in don't go near the exit gates. Once the match is over I usually just alt tab to a show for a few minutes and wait them out. They can waste their time like the kids they are.
3 -
I think it’s funny how you believe flashlight clicking and getting the killers attention to take aggro are done in a malicious way…. But somehow camping and tunneling is done as a “strat”.
A strat would suggest the killer has an intention of winning, shaking your head and sitting at a hook with a 1k at the end isn’t a strat and it is definitely not a win.
Just thought I would correct your double standard.
Post edited by Johnny_XMan on2 -
Shaking your head at the end is not a strat, but that's not a general component of either camping or tunnelling.
Facecamping at the end is a strat and is sometimes the only thing someone can choose to do (if they have the killer for it). Sit on hook with one Survivor, or walk off to the exit gates and have everyone get out?
Like, the problem here is that camping and tunnelling cover a very wide range of behaviours depending on who you ask. Teabagging and flashlight clicking are narrowly defined.
4 -
Well, after losing some good salespeo--- I mean fog whisperers, what do you expect? People follow the leader sadly, especially youngsters.
0 -
Honestly, that made me chuckle pretty good. If I came to that, I'd probably start head banging and spinning around trying to dance.
2 -
Whoever said that killers only do it at the end?
I guess when you can find the perfect scenario which fits your belief, it makes sense.
1 -
"shaking your head and sitting at a hook with a 1k at the end"
"Whoever said that killers only do it at the end?"
Literally you brought up the '"at the end" argument.
Flashlight clicking isn't a strat, body blocking and chase trading are. I already went over this, its not a double standard, click and t-bag have no gameplay benefit, camping and tunneling do. Clicking and t-bag actively detriment your gameplay just to try and be annoying. If you want to help another survivor in chase, clicking is not the way to go, go body block.
I'm using the same standard for both as I already outlined.
Post edited by MrPenguin on4 -
Er... you were the one who started talking about at the end, lack of clarity in what that means isn't my fault.
Anyway, my point was quite simple: calling a narrowly-defined behaviour toxic is very different from calling some broad-strokes thing nobody can seemingly agree on a definition for toxic.
3 -
Toxic hasn't necessarily lost its meaning, as it's a vague term in the first place. It's really an alternate way of saying mean or unsportsmanlike. Some people have an inaccurate idea of what's mean (annoying but effective tactics). Can you agree that either side actively wasting the other side's time as much as the game's mechanics allow is inherently unsportsmanlike or, dare I say, toxic? Survivors running the timers out on the exit gate in the hopes of taunting the killer from an area of safety (doesn't just waste the killer's time either, as a survivor may be spectating to see the killer's build only to wait an unnecessary 2 minutes), or a killer running the bleed-out timer dry when the game is effectively won are the primary examples of this.
Also, it should not be controversial that flashlight macros are inherently toxic, since they exist simply to make a sound more obnoxious than typically possible, and should have been patched out years ago. You can't even argue that "it's part of the game" as you have to set something up external to the game to engage in more annoying behavior.
4 -
I don't think it's necessarily practical to ban people for being toxic -- but I don't think it helps the toxicity when the developers treat it like it's normal and not a big deal. I get that, when you've been marinating in it for a long time, it doesn't seem as shocking anymore, but that doesn't make it healthy.
4 -
What about survivors waiting till the last second to leave when they are right next to the gate?
0 -
Right, I brought it up to show that the “end” result is not a win (I.E. that strat isn’t a strat, it might have also been because they just wanted to BM that one survivor. Which was in conjunction with what was brought up about “Camping is a legit strat” when there are many times that killers do not give a <bad word> whether they lose or win, they want to make someone feel like they are not playing the game. Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black scenario to me.
Also perhaps it would be good if you read the context of the question. Since the question was: Whoever said that killers only camp at the end of the match? In relation to your comment about “if a killer camps at the end that’s a strat”. It was a direct response to that not to anything said prior.
Sounds to me like you like to take chunks and pieces of conversations and respond to them without any idea of the context.
0 -
"The way people perceive it" isn't a good argument. These actions have meanings ascribed to them and the meanings are the reason people do them - the point is to aggravate the other player. Flashlight clicking is endemic to DBD, but tbags have a common meaning across game culture and it is unanimously a taunt. I've said this a lot, but "you're just perceiving it as aggressive" is the same logic that a middle finger doesn't mean anything unless you let it mean something because it's a hand gesture, and you shouldn't get peeved over "your mom should have gotten an abortion" because it's just mouth noises. Tbagging is a language. When your injured teammate walks up to you and tbags, they're asking for a heal, not communicating the location of the killer via Morse Code or expressing their feelings about the map. If you spawn next to another survivor at the start of the game and they tbag, they're saying hello, not asking you to follow them or telling you you suck. And you know this because you've been exposed to this before and it has a standard meaning in DBD. Likewise, survivors tbagging at pallets or the gates aren't saying "hey, great game, you played well!" or "if I vibrate hard enough, I believe I can achieve flight". They're taunting you.
So yeah. It's not the gesture I'm angry at, it's that the other player is being rude to me for no reason, and they want me to know that they're being rude to me.
I actually do think this game turns people toxic because of pent-up frustration with the other players, as well as some osmotic learning on the survivor side; you quickly learn that tbagging at the gates and yelling at the killer over X, Y, and Z is just what people do. I dunno, I browse the forum and Reddit often and practically the most common kind of post is people expressing how much they've come to hate the other side because of how they're treated in game.
I mean, it'd be even better if people just didn't do that and I wasn't faced with the choice of either wasting two minutes or vindicating a bunch of gloating children every single killer match I neither 4k nor farm in.
I also don't really see the differentiation between immature and toxic in this case? Toxic to me is acting specifically to try and aggravate other players, with no gameplay benefit or any gameplay benefit being a secondary goal to making the other players mad. It's often immature, but it doesn't make it any less toxic in and of itself. Unless we just have different definitions of toxic, which is quite possible.
4 -
The devs straight up do promote toxicity, did everyone forget how they said they wanted to make sure teabagging was still satisfying when they made the new animations?
4 -
Yes, it's fine for the killer to slug without hooking. Is it fun? No. T-bagging and flashlight clicking is fine as well. I've said this before, and I'll say it again: People need to ignore it. If you can't handle those things, then you probably shouldn't be playing (not specifically talking about you).
1 -
So toxic. "How dare they click a flashlight at me!!". lol
1 -
I mean, you could water any toxicity down in the same way, "getting offended by words? Ha ha." Like???
2 -
Words don't really affect me either. There is a difference between clicking a flashlight and telling someone to kill themselves, though.
0
