http://dbd.game/killswitch
Why there are linked cosmetics anyways?
I understand some DLC characters or persona like cosmetics are linked but, what about the others? Biggest part of the cosmetics are being able to mix them together, why there is a feature like this anyways?
Comments
-
They say it gives them more freedom to make sets, because they can make things like dresses and hoodies that would either not make sense when broken up into separate pieces, or clip through existing cosmetics.
In reality though, it's because you can't just get the piece you want at 1/3 the price. They can charge more because you have to buy all of them to get what you want.
I find it particularly tasteless that last year we had feedback surveys asking us if we'd like linked sets to be less restricted, to which I can't imagine anyone really said "no thanks, I like being limited." That would probably include removing weapons from the linked conditions for killers, and other extra pieces like the head slot for Janes dress etc that have no reason to be linked to the rest of the outfit. Since then not a single set has been less than 3 linked pieces, and they've pumped out more of them than ever.
I personally haven't seen a single person who likes the idea that they aren't allowed to mix and match the pieces, nor one who would particularly care if their cosmetics clipped a little. In fact almost all the talk surrounding linked sets is about how people hate that they're linked, would buy them if they weren't, or have spent time trying to break the game in order to mix them with other outfits.
15 -
Because some outfits make sense. Now sure, there are some outfits that fit perfectly that should be mixable, but let's look at some outfits that make sense as a set. The Blighted Ghost Face. Now lets throw out that it's a license for a second and just analyze the skin. The way the mask works makes sense for it to be a set. Wouldn't look right with the others. Those types of skins fit for a set. But there are certainly some weird ones I will say.
1 -
money
1 -
Because of clipping issues of course! I mean look at this:
/s
12 -
They say this but Nancy has mi a le dresses and bunny feng exists
0 -
Surely they would make more money when people buy individual pieces instead of not buying it at all?
0 -
It's money, the majority of the linked sets have atleast one piece that wouldn't clip with anything,some make sense as a full set like the skins that change the whole character like Cybil or Chris but every other set is only a full set because of money.
1 -
Clipping is a bad excuse as to why sets are needed. If you want to look more visually horrifying than most of the Killers as Survivor for example you can already do that. If you want to wear an outfit that clips and looks horrible then that should be a choice you can make.
1 -
When they released sets they said they would be ,,2 or 3 pieces linked together" yet it's been so long and we still don't have a 2 piece set. (which the majority of them should be,like Kate's Oktoberfest dress)
0 -
You guys can talk about clipping isn't an issue but this is literally Kates torso with any other legs than the "set". I do agree that a lot of things don't need to be sets (like her head, for example). But there are definitely good reasons for sets.
1 -
I'm more than sure that Bunny Feng would be a set if it was released today,I think it only escaped because sets were not in the game at the time.
0 -
but my point is they can make hoodies n ######### without having them as sets
0 -
They already confirmed they are looking at existing sets and see if they can split them up either completely or one of the three pieces.
it’s BHVR, so it is a matter of ‚soon‘ as all things will take time.
also accusing them kn this case of being greedy or only doing it because of the money is just a lazy and not thought-through ‚argument‘: yes they would get more money if a person decides to buy the whole set if they like one piece out of it. But do you actually know it that happens? As far as I have observed, linked sets are pretty rarely used and I wouldn’t be surprised if they get less money out of these in total. But we don’t know either way as we are missing the data.
0 -
It's not like Kate doesn't have a midriff already modeled and in the game. The only reason that piece doesn't have it is because it's linked so they didn't have to bother about putting it in where it would be hidden by what you're forced to wear it with.
God forbid someone spend an hour to cut and paste a midriff on the bottom from existing cosmetics.
1 -
how would you cut and paste a midriff onto that exactly? It's a dress not a crop top.
yes just plonk a midriff onto this please.
0 -
Does that really need explanation?
You see that part between the bottom of her top and the top of her jeans? That's where the midriff goes.
Literally nobody would have questioned it if linked sets had never existed, it would frankly look fine with any other bottom.
1 -
Wait they actually said that?
0 -
@EvaZioN - "Can you make linked outfits more flexible?"
As soon as the QnA was announced this was asked practically immidiately lol.
The team is looking into making non-licensed sets more accessible to mix + match, such as killer weapons or survivor heads. Sets exist to help minimise clipping, however these pieces they're looking into usually don't clip. This will be done on a case-by-case basis.
Licensed sets will remain locked for legal reasons.
quote from @GoodBoyKaru s summary thread found here:
2 -
supposedly, it's so there's more freedom for cosmetic designs since you don't have to worry about individual pieces not working with others.
in reality it's a way to get people to pay full price for cosmetics that are completely capable of being separated. still haven't forgiven bhvr for that jill set with the default hair which you still have to pay full price for.
2 -
Often not. Many sets are really popular, like Feng's weekly linked sets among others.
Importantly, if there's a piece you would like, 7k shards is a lot, but certainly managable with regular gameplay. Many people would be more likely to grab a nice item with their shards than fork over cash. When it's a linked set, they usually either cost cells only for the lot, or a ludicrous amount of shards like 21k, which is essentially $10 when you consider you can buy a full unlicensed chapter at that price. People who want a cosmetic aren't likely to wait 6 months of grinding for it when they can just get it for cash, so BHVR gets more money.
0 -
Yeah but they look awful. Anytime someone wears the bunny hood with a different torso, I cringe.
0 -
The issue now is that the stomach is always there, and it will be present in every cosmetic she uses (even the dress that extends up, it's just how the cosmetics are, so then you have belly clipping though the skirt), and then if you fix the texture on the torso that texture will also have a weird seam with it's actual bottom half (the skirt portion). It;s annoying and it's how the cosmetic system works it's not as easy as simply including a midriff with the torso.
0 -
Don’t only blame BHVR. It’s also Capcoms fault. Blame both.
Licensed sets will remain locked for legal reasons.
1 -
even still i can't see why they couldn't just make it a two-piece cosmetic. i'd rather not get licensed cosmetics at all if license holders won't let you mix them.
0 -
two-piece cosmetic is also not possible at the moment for legal reasons. Pretty straight forward.
i agree with you btw. I would consider buying single pieces for license characters, especially pants for Cheryl or even a different colored skirt. But it is this way because BHVR AND the license holder decided it this way and we don’t know the actual reasons here.
0 -
Most new parts dont clip well with old parts, so thats not a reason.
There are only two viable reasons for linked cosmetics: 1. They change the character, like Baba Yaga Huntress - 2. They are already linked by design, like onesies.
1
