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!
FUN shoulnd be an argument because its not easy to balance for FUN
the biggest plague this community has is the whole fun argument. for one side playing a fair round is fun for another side its only fun if you win and then you got people that only have fun when they can harress the enemy and toy with them.
so there is no clear that is fun to play side and then you get people that say they only play scummy because the other side playes scummy. for example i am a killer main that doesnt camp or tunnel am i now entitelt to only get face survivor that act nice and polite? do i get a little flag in the lobby so people see im a nice guy and they need to act acordingly. i give hatch to the last surv when i have a 3k does this mean when i lose one surv has to offer themself to me.
these examples are ofcourse a bit over the top but what i want to say is we need to stop bringing fun as a weapon to arguments. stuff like camping sucks and needs to go because one thing that is 100% not fun is hanging on a hook all game just like it wasnt fun that you coulnd do anything about dh for distance. otherwise i think we cant use fun as a metric for balance because we have so many diffrent people playing this game that get there fun from so many diffrent things that it is impossible to make it fun for everyone.
what do you people think about that?
Comments
-
I think it may be hard, but game developers have to do it. It's WHY people play.
And while it may be hard to optimize for fun, i think it is easier to say these changes moved the game in a direction of less fun.
13 -
I do think some things that are generally unfun for everyone, or the vast majority, should be prevented.
But it is simultaneously true that not everyone has the same idea of fun. I personally have most fun playing friendly and adopting survivors. My best friend has most fun when stomping.
2 -
exactly what i think. the truly awefull stuff should go but you cant make it always fun for everyone because you will always have someone that only has fun when he wins wich is fair but then you cant have two side where only one can win
0 -
Not true at all.
You think majority of survivor players don't mind to go againts forever builds with slowdown powers where the game can take up to whole 30 min? I don't think so.
Who would want to play unfun game? Fun metters, that's why we all play games (at least usualy).
5 -
DBD is a game, and a game by definition is 'an activity that one engages in for amusement or fun', but who's fun? fun can always potentially be at the expense of someone else's, sad fact.
Like you said though, fun is subjective.. but anyone who gets their enjoyment from harassing other players, be it hook slashing endlessly, trolling, teabagging every opportunity, flashlight clicking like an #########, needs to take a hard look at themselves. It's other 'people' they are playing against.
Personally the only things that make a match 'unfun' for me, are being tunnelled out or hook camped being unable to realistically do anything about it. The only reason i stick out the match is not the DC penalty, i could care less about 5min DC penalty and losing out on 5k BP, is that the time I'm on hook gives the other survivors time to work on gens if they're smart about it. Feel bad when they try to come in for a pointless save though, just be be downed and replace me in that unfun situation. Feel like a base Kindred would be a nice feature, rather than having to use a perk slot bringing it. Maybe with everyone using it, BHVR will see it as a new meta later and introduce it as base.
I also don't need to escape to consider a game fun either. As long as i get to actually 'participate and contribute' to the match, so someone at least gets closer to escaping or actually escapes. Even if it ends in a 4K but we got close to an escape, it was still worth it.
2 -
Fun isn't a metric for balance, but things can be balanced in a fun way and in a non-fun way.
If you get a killer that starts the trial with the ability to instantly kill two survivors, but that subsequently is completely unable to interact with the remaining two, that would be immaculately balanced, and absolutely zero fun for both parties.
3 -
Fun can be an argument, but issue is people dont care for other people's fun and just theirs and that's why it's a bad thing.
Some people hate certain killers and call them unfun because they feel they struggle against them yet alot of players can play against them fine.
But iv always been one to think of others, I get called a killer main for alot of what I say but in reality I'm a survivor main and understand certain things arent fair or fun for the other role.
The biggest issue I see is "I didnt escape, that game was unfun and unfair" when in reality they, or their team played bad or worse than the killer.
Personally I feel we should encourage longer games and balance for skill and hooks so camping &tunneling is punished.
But survivors dont like longer gens because "boring" but you cant expect a killer to do chases on all different people if he doesnt have time.
Theres 2 sides to pvp, your fun doesnt matter more than your opponents
3 -
that is actually a really good example
0 -
Its...actually easier to balance for fun than you think. But you have to break alot of base game, which they already did recently.
You cant balance a game where there are 2 types of survivors: No 2nd chance and 4x 2nd chance, not mention SWF. And 2 types of killers: fair play killers (who also usually using low tier killers), and hard core tunneling/camping.
0 -
People play games for fun. If overwhelming majority of players complain about something being really unfun, that should maybe be looked at.
1 -
I don't think it's as black and white as "balance should be about making it fun" and "balance shouldn't be about making stuff fun". In an ideal situation, you'd be able to make something more enjoyable to go against and more balanced, but that's not always going to be achievable - however if it CAN be achieved, then it should be.
Ultimately it's an assymetrical PvP game so both sides have different experiences, so it's almost impossible to make it equally 'fun' for both sides and it's going to be subjective. I think one of the biggest examples I can think of something being incredibly unfun to go against but wasn't even THAT powerful was launch Legion. Without add-ons it took them such a long time to down people that they weren't particularly 'powerful' to go against, but there's nothing engaging, interesting, or even exciting about being slowly stabbed to downed whilst being able to do very little against it.
I think they should always strive to make gameplay healthier - I would much rather they make decisions that reduce the unenjoyable gameplay elements from BOTH sides (camping, tunnelling, gens being completed before you can even reach them, maps that have lots of strong connected pallets, strong buildings, etc) and then balance accordingly if needs be elsewhere.
0 -
An overwhelming majority of killers think it’s massively unfun to go against a SWF with voice communication, to the point where BHVR can’t ever let the killer know if the lobby contains a SWF. Does that mean SWFs should be looked at?
0 -
There is no way SWF can be looked at, unless you remove the mode, or restrict them to have 2 men...
But you can buff Solo close to SWF and then buff Killer.
But even then, I dont want to play a game that Killers keep tunnneling/camping one, while other M1 Gen and hope the other guy runs his best.
0 -
The only way to fairly balance voice communication is by giving all 5 players increased information. It’s not fair to normalize all the survivors getting increased information, but then tell the killer they aren’t allowed to have increased information.
0 -
I think you’re having fun so you don’t devs to touch anything
0 -
Yes, obviously.
0 -
The only thing I don’t like about the word “fun” is it’s kind of vague. Fun is really subjective and it’s not obvious why something is fun or not for a given person. When I’m making a suggestion I try to use other words to be a little more specific about what it is I think is an issue that makes it not as enjoyable for me.
For instance, I can understand excessive game length being a possible concern that could impact how fun a game is. If a DbD game drags on for 20-30 minutes it’ll feel too long, even if the ultimate result is close. Game length isn’t about “balance” as in which side wins or loses but about how long it takes to get that end result. One of the common complaints about Legion games for instance is how long they can last as opposed to Legion having a higher kill rate than average.
Likewise for player downtime. I don’t find survivor as fun to play as killer for instance because it has a lot of downtime where you are either stuck on a hook or dying or holding a button on a generator and the killer is nowhere near you. Maximizing the amount of time you actually get to have the killer be a threat to you that you should hide or run from while still allowing for the survivors as a whole to be able to escape is probably the ideal goal of the game design.
0 -
I love playing unfun games! Everyone does, that's why they're so popular!
0
