What's up with sadistic survivors/killers?
Comments
-
Completely agree
0 -
It is deep, it's not "just a computer game". Dbd is a very deep game in its apparent simplicity.
0 -
EDIT: also this happens with killers too, with some Nurses mains using range add-ons, or Blights, tunneling, eating DS and then hitting you on hook even if you played super fair without Dead hard.
^That's from your post. I'm not trying to start anything, I didn't add or remove any context the last time I posted as I quoted you directly.
If you meant something else other than what was conveyed in your opening post i.e. things written in later posts I haven't been in this thread watching it.
0 -
What I meant is that there's some sort of correlation between those using them and those not using them. Correlation ≠ causality, so the correlation here is that those who use recharge or other add-ons tend to play sportive, and those using range for some reason tend to be more toxic. Does this mean that who uses range add-ons is automatically toxic? No, of course not, especially if you don't know about the bug.
0 -
There is a difference between writing well and writing a lot. It actually says very little.
0 -
Oh ya definitely! I can tell how the game is gonna be by how fast the first gen clears lol
1 -
No its really not. Its the same as being upset when a favorite character dies in a fiction, yeah you enjoyed that character but the story has removed them, engage with the story itself not just the character. When all's said and done it doesn't matter because its fictional.
The whole point of fiction is escapism and entertainment, if you let your escapism bleed into your real life where you can no longer discern the fictional inconsequential disappointment over a game/story, from real life disappointment and distress then you've taken it to far and need to step back and stop.
Many of the elements that people complain about in DBD are the things that make the game interesting. The threat of elimination is your motivation for wanting to escape. Eliminate that threat and you have a very bland generic gameplay experience.
Part of the gameplay experience will be antagonistic and zero sum but its only a game nothing tangible is lost or gained.
0 -
"The whole point of fiction is escapism and entertainment, if you let your escapism bleed into your real life where you can no longer discern the fictional inconsequential disappointment over a game/story, from real life disappointment and distress then you've taken it to far and need to step back and stop."
You overstimate the mental conciousness of the average gamer and humans, people fall in all sorts of unhealthy addictions, very few show a good enough awareness about their life choices to adjust it regulary for the positive. There are people with multiple thousands of gameplay hours as well as multiple thousand comments on these forums which is already questionable as a life choice and time investment either.
When it goes after this logic we would as well need no text chat filter. We should just expect that people are mentally experienced enough to not get annoyed by anything stated in the post game chat. Yet developer and community agree that its currently positive for the game to keep it. As an individual gamer you can argue that this isnt your responsibility, but as a developer which view-perspective we discuss you could consider it from an ethical/social and/or as well as an marketing standpoint.
And if you like it or not thats what BHVR deemed already as professional in the past with addressing issues like the triggering of the mori animation.
"Many of the elements that people complain about in DBD are the things that make the game interesting. The threat of elimination is your motivation for wanting to escape. Eliminate that threat and you have a very bland generic gameplay experience."
Again, we dont talk about base game mechanics like hooking and killing which are neccessary for the game, we talk about unneccessary exploits that do nothing for the gameplay or horror experience. You are currently defending stuff like macro flashlights that doesnt influence the gameplay beside playing an annoying to unbearable sound.
I think weve reached the qualitive limit of this point of discussion and since im not interested to derail into personal and formal accusations in comments on a gaming forum, i will leave this thread for people who will provide other viewangles and further discussion about not if but what counts as the same case then the updated mori interaction of our current gameplay elements.
Post edited by Impalpable on2 -
ok lets bring it back out of existential perception and back to gameplay
"tbagging, flashlight macroing, rage quitting when a bully failed, slurs in chat." The OP list of unacceptable in game behaviour, yeah I mostly agree as most of these things a pointless and the last two are genuine toxicity.
"Nurses mains using range add-ons, or Blights, tunneling, eating DS and then hitting you on hook" Here is where it gets iffy, Range addons are just strong addons not toxic attacks on people's fun, same for blights addons using them is not sadistic its just strong. Hitting on hook I can forgive because hey its thematically appropriate for a horror setting.
Whether or not they are too strong isn't the topic... the topic is people being intentionally sadistic through their gameplay.
You aren't playing 'fair' by not tunneling camping or using DS these are just playstyles and game mechanics. Again are they too strong... not the discussion, the discussion is why are sadists using them more.
Calling people who play legit in game mechanics sadists is BS. Its another "I don't find this fun so therefore nobody should find this fun" argument, which again is BS.
We got off on a tangent in response to a thesis written about the cultural perceptions of acceptable group behaviour in social circles which was just a complete load of garbage really. A bunch of broad generic statements detailing the obvious nature of social expectations didn't really add anything to the discussion other than a lot of text.
Your mori example is what I'm talking about, changing mechanics of something that was busted, its the first example you've really given that required a change as it existed only to stall the game. Its a completely legit argument to say anyone doing that was stalling the game purely with the intent of being a jerk.
I agree with you on flashlight macros too they seem to exist only to annoy people but they can't stall the game so mechanically they have less influence, while annoying you can't hold the game hostage with them is the point. (This isn't a defense of them its just a pragmatic assessment).
However much of what you list is just gameplay, engaging in gameplay doesn't make people sadists, scumbags or any of the other words people like to throw at each other purely because they didn't get the match they wanted. That is my point.
1 -
The more people get bored, the more they are willing to be #########. The more people are ######### with them, the more they want to karma assholery back. And herd thinking, if one of the players is being an annoying ass by spamming everything they possibly can, obviously other players NEED to mimic that behaviour. But most of the time, they legit don't see any problem with all that, despite being told endless time, and just keep spreading toxicity because it's the only way they feel they can have fun.
And the more I get bullied by playing casually and trying new things, the more willing I am to absolutely brutalize every survivor on the next match, by aggressively slugging, tunelling down, camping a hook stage for a quick mori, and bringing them to the hatch only to close it on their faces.
0 -
Oh I know how you feel, like yesterday I went against a Oni player who only camps and tunnels players for using ds and dead hard. I wasn’t even using them but he still kept hitting me on the hook. Even though I was not using dead hard or ds. All I was using urban evasion, Kindred, self care, and empathy.
0 -
I understand how you feel cause I’ve been dealing a lot bullies too. But camping and tunneling is how a killer is supposed to win. I personally don’t think sadistic is the right word but I understand the frustration. I probably would of also gone with immature cause there some immature kids and adults who enjoy ruining other’s fun. I also feel ds, dead hard, and no-Ed are also sometimes necessary to help you have a somewhat easier match. I also been trying to play a little more fair in my killer matches recently meaning I’m trying not to camp and tunnel as much. I also don’t teabag or spam flashlights at the killer cause I think teabaging and flashlight spamming to others who did nothing wrong, is just rude but in my opinion. But anyway some people can be just rude in general and you can’t change how they act sometimes. But anyway I hope you get better games soon.
0 -
Our community keeps forgetting a lot of children and teens play this game. I too, make the mistake of assuming there is an adult behind EVERY DBD character. Not so.
2 -
questo è quello che succede quando i devs ignorano l'enorme tossicità presente nel gioco (o la incitano per essere più precisi), si arriva al punto in cui te ne freghi di avere un match divertente per tutti e ti concentri solo sul vincere e umiliare il tuo avversario nel peggiore dei modi...
this is what happen when the devs ignore the huge amount of toxicity present in the game (or to be more precise they incentive it), you'll find yourself at the point that you won't care anymore about doing a fun match for everyone and you'll focus only about winning and humiliate your opponent in the worst possible way...
1 -
Because it's fun
0 -
It was also precise.
0 -
I'd hate to say it but it really wasn't. In fact it was remarkably broad and generic.
"(Human-) Toxicity has from what ive read no clear definition. If i would have to come up with a definition based on my perception i would say its negative behaviour that goes beyond whats social acceptable for a community. In connection to social interactive behaviour between humans i would say vaguely, its basically everything a person does out of the intent or apathic ignorance to cast negativity upon someone as main reason with no defendable second objective in the view of a community, or in short terms anti-social behaviour."
This section is a very good example, basically it says that any behaviour that could be viewed negatively or negatively impacting another is toxicity unless you can find a socially acceptable secondary objective beyond giving offense.
Lets apply this to DBD... the intent of the game is for your opponent to eliminate you from it, by the example definition, the game's core mechanic is already toxic as its targeted and its negative. At a social level just playing the game should be offensive.
I have more but I couldn't be bothered dissecting it any further for obvious reasons. (Its only DBD, its social importance can't be understated as it not important at all in the broad scheme of things).
This is the problem with long winded "academic" speak, while it sounds great its often so unspecific that its application is just vague enough to be applied anywhere. Horoscopes work on the same premise. So does pseudo profundity to a large extent. I review so many papers that are made up of this kind of waffle that it gets tiresome.
There are one or two good points buried in it but it's definitely not precise.
0
