Can we stop weaponising the community? (flashlight changes)
This isn't the first time. Don't get me wrong, I don't care for the flashlight changes, I use them too infrequently to be too impacted.
But can we stop using people as an excuse to nerf things in the game? If you want to nerf flashlights whether to prevent BM or to just nerf it, just say it. Don't give a lame excuse about how this is a change for the section of the community that suffers from epilepsy, if you had cared enough, you would've listened to that part of the community if not 5 years ago, then 4, 3 or even 2.
We get it, you want to buff killer, we get it. We really do. But don't do it by trying to make it seem as if this is because you care for the community.
Comments
-
How are you not weaponizing the topic when you're implying that its changed only as an excuse to nerf, rather than an actual valid reason? Its not even killer specific since flashlight macroing affects survivors with photosensitivity issues just as much, while you're literally turning it into a partisan issue in the post you're telling people not to.
64 -
Well, I can already tell you that nothing is gonna change about flashlights balance wise. Ruling that out, I don't see why it even matters.
Mind you, they've done changes like this before, just for people with photosensitivity issues. Think Doc, think Sadako, even some maps, if memory serves. Yes, they're slow, and yes they could do more, but to say they don't care is just false.
20 -
Because if the developers cared about accessibility, it would've been changed to not trigger epilepsy years ago. Clicking flashlights has been a feature ever since the beginning. Not once did the developers care to cater to that part of the community.
I am criticising the developers for not having a backbone. it's a PR message to protect themselves had they gotten backlash.
5 -
How long is the cooldown? I am just wondering because there were legit times when you thought you had an angle and had to cancel and restart. I am interested to see how long in between each time it is.
2 -
You know that "the devs" are not just one person who does not learn, right? It could be that they actually listened to user accounts and educated themselves on the topic. They have certainly had mixed results on their approach to accessability (with a very fair share of quagmires in itself) but if you check in the PTB they even started to carve out a section of the options specifically for it. They are tonedeaf on it sometimes, but that doesn't mean they're not making an effort. Just a slow and sometimes off the mark effort. That doesn't mean you demean them when they get something right, you help them learn from why they get things wrong when they do.
9 -
My point is, clicking flashlights, especially to trigger epilepsy has been in the games since the beginning. It's been an issue and that part of the community always vocalised that.
I don't think it's about learning, I think it is just a way to protect themselves. The same way they released the Cheater update upon the out-rage across the community, which was nothing more than powerpoint pictures of 'how many people they banned'.
3 -
Not too sure, again. I don't care for the actual changes, I just think them using the people that suffer from epilepsy is outrageous
1 -
Damn, can't believe they're improving accessibility so everyone can have a normal playing experience. Just because they weren't good at doing so in the past doesn't mean they can't make up for it by doing it now.
18 -
The fact that "it's been in the game for years" doesn't provide any evidence for either motive.
If they just wanted to change them to "buff killers" (not even sure how it's a killer buff) then they also could have done it years ago.
11 -
This isn't a "nerf" in any meaningful sense. The ability to use flashlights for their intended purpose (blinding) is barely, and I mean barely (even that word is pushing it) affected by this.
The ability to use flashlights to be an obnoxious ass is decimated by this, but who is this affecting? Obnoxious asses. The issue is what exactly?
24 -
At least adress them correctly.
it’s the company, the higher ups that (probably) don’t care enough about accessibility. The developers themselves don’t really have the power to just do what they care about the most and they have often expressed and shown that they do are about it (eg Mandy being colorblind herself and being part of the dev-team)
3 -
So you think it should just never have been fixed, rather than eventually getting addressed? I don't understand what moral high ground you're trying to stand on here but its shaky at best. It wouldn't matter if they did it because someone on the team thought it would help their chances in that weeks lottery drawing, the end result is positive for accessibility and they are showing signs of improving their accessibility accommodations.
One of the first things that got mentioned about the FoV change as described was that it would further cause issues for people who suffer from motion sickness due to its lack of accessibility options in the game. PTB rolls around, and now they've added an option to prevent the FoV change from happening after being called out on how the auto-adjustment ignored the situation. They still havent fixed the overall accessibility of FoV in the game, but they listened to a concern and prevented the change from making it worse. I have no doubt there are people listening to the community about these things, and it could very well be that its just been a matter of executive decisions no longer stopping them from being introduced and accommodated for where they can.
12 -
Where is the nerf? The flashlight have the same effectivity as always for blinding the killer. Not being able to use a flashlight to annoy other players with no other purpose than being annoying is not a nerf.
7 -
Again, not sure why that is your take-away from my post. I am not against the change in of itself, I am against them trying to hide the change behind it being an 'accessibility' change because it's a lame way to protect yourself against criticism.
2 -
Did you read my post or just the bottom sentence?
1 -
It's a nerf in the fact that it's gonna mean you have to be 100% accurate with your timing on the blind/saves as re-timing won't really work. But that is not my point of this thread.
2 -
1
-
Where the hell did i say that? I literally said I don't care for the change, I am not saying it shouldn't be implemented. I literally said they shouldn't be hiding it behind 'this is for accessiblity!!!' when if it were, they should've implemented this years ago! #########, what a way to miss the mark, mate.
You are just looking for a fight tbh. if you continue to try to manipulate my words i am gonna ignore you
1 -
Did you make the same argument when they literally did that with the spine chill walkback? Because even when people called them out on it, they would rather have the people affected be taken care of and ignore the fact that their reasoning had nothing to do with accessibility vs when killers have no audible TR. It was an actual case of what you are implying happened with the flashlight change, and most people were annoyed but accepting because its better than the affected players being left unable to play the game reasonably.
4 -
I will always criticise developers weaponising their community. Not sure what your point is.
Never against positive changes that are there for accessibility. But intentions are always clear when an accessibility issue takes you 5 years to resolve despite working on the flashlights multiple times throughout that time.
1 -
Yes.
It's neither a flashlight nerf nor killer buff. You seem to be implying that their stated reasons for "nerfing" flashlights/buffing killers is disingenuous.
But it's neither a true buff or nerf, so who cares what the reasoning is? It's only affecting a certain subset of the surv base for reasons that aren't really valid.
But while not perfect, BHVR has addressed accessibility issues, so it's not a total stretch to think that was at least a consideration here. But again, no one is impacted negatively here for reasons that are worthy of consideration, so the sincerity of BHVR's reasoning isn't all that important, really.
It's not a move that needs justification.
6 -
How am I looking for a fight when that is the entire point of you making this conversation? You're misatributing your own assumptions on why the devs did this with no evidence other than how long it took them to actually do something about it. My argument is that they are taking steps in the right direction (even though they still slip up sometimes) so your cynicism carries less weight and serves zero constructive purpose. This topic is literally intended for you to argue with people who defend the devs finally warming up to accessibility options.
6 -
Ooh I see. You're angry because you can't curse out BHVR for implementing a "killer sided" change without coming across as if you hate children with epilepsy.
So you've pulled the "how dare you make me look like the bad guy" card.
What a Karen move.
8 -
It is a nerf. It's not a huge nerf but it is a nerf in the fact that you will be more punished for mis-timing your flashlight, I am not willing to discuss the nerf/buff or whatever any further though as it's not the point of my thread.
Also, I am just criticising them for hiding behind the community on the change, I never agree with things like that and some users in this thread have taken quite personally to that, not sure why LOL.
2 -
What? I literally said I don't use flashlights LOL. I am not affected by the change in the slightest because I am not a user of the item. If I wanted to cry about pandering I would be crying about the mori system and how Otz ended a game in 15 seconds on the PTB, but I don't care about that.
I'd rather the company be up-front and honest that they want to make the flashlight more punishing and a bit more skill-based, rather than to finally take into account the complaints and issues users with epilepsy have faced for 6 years in this game.
Not sure why that makes me a bad guy, nor do i care really.
1 -
Yeah, doing something good/positive for insincere reasons (assuming for the sake of argument they actually are insincere) is always better than not doing anything.
The world is full of people/groups doing really good things strictly out of self interest or to improve their image. It's not ideal, and kind of slimy, but clearly still better than not acting at all.
4 -
This isn't the first time? Yeah we know, we literally just got a PTB for a rework sparked by other Survivors and Devs weaponizing the community. Are you actually bothered by this or is it because you don't want them to "Buff" Killers by removing obnoxious Flashlight spam from the game?
2 -
It's barely noticeable, and what little change there is will be adjusted to quickly.
Again, the motivation is almost irrelevant. It doesn't even merit a need for justification, or to "hide behind" anyone. The change is so insignificant that starting a debate on the validity of their reasoning seems like it can be nothing but a pretext to start some sort of drama.
You're pretty clearly bothered by this and instigating (weaponizing, if you will) here, whether you admit/recognize it or not.
And if you're hellbent to gatekeep positive actions by equating their validity with the sincerity of their stated reasoning, you'll find no shortage of nits to pick anywhere, or with anyone. Because no one does anything for selfless or totally intellectually honest reasons.
5 -
Can we just start banning this nonsense. It's either rage bait or actual ableist drivel. This thread and others like it are not adding anything good to the community or the game at large.
8 -
Because you are directly manipulating my words.
Your post that I responded to, stated that 'I wished it had never been implemented' when my original post stated from the FIRST sentence that I didn't care for the actual change but the reasoning for the change, which I think is fake and just a PR move to protect themselves from further criticism.
Why do I think that?
They have a cheater epidemic, they are implementing controversial changes (MORIs and UB Basekit), criticism for not even attemping to fix specific killers that had issues for YEARS.
Why would they not make a change that will 'positively' change the game? Especially using the excuse for accessibility? BHVR is known for not changing things unless they absolutely break the game, or until it is convenient for them. Not sure why me criticising them on this, where the foundation of my belief is years of their behaviour and attitude towards changes, PR messages and how they handle criticism affects you so much? Or why you're trying to convince me that my beliefs on this situation are wrong or worth debating?
1 -
I feel there's been a massive shift in the devs. They are not the same devs as in 2016-2018 which would have never nerfed flashlights. Some of the old devs are gone anyway. Everything is about buffing killer at the expensive of survivor fun. At this point, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the brown medkit is nerfed for some weird reason.
But, It's perfectly fine Huntress can down someone with a single hatchet, Pig can start everyone with a head trap, or Wesker can start everyone infected but lets nerf everything survivors have.
2 -
Because you specifically said, in the very topic title, that it is concerning the flashlight change. All of the subtext in that entire post is that you don't like the flashlight change, then you just put a disclaimer that you totally don't care. The irony is that you're complaining about the devs using accessibility complaints from the community as an excuse to make this change for some spooky underhanded reason, when you're projecting by making this very topic and framing it the way you have. The only other takeaway is that you wanted a platform to talk down on the devs and are using a positive change as collateral in your stance.
Deflecting onto other entirely unrelated issues means nothing. Putting a delay on flashlights did not undo their roadmap on how they are going to handle the cheating issue, its not going to prevent optimization of the game, you didn't even mention the UB/Mori changes in the topic title nor your first post.
3 -
you're looking for an excuse to be angry.
11 -
Wait, someone is turning the community into weapons?
When did that happen?
1 -
? I didn't say i didn't like it. I quite literally said I am indifferent to it.
Me saying that it is to buff the killers is an elbow into their side. It doesn't mean I am against the change lmfao
1 -
But if you are not sure how can you call it a nerf?
Im usually open minded about things, and that’s why I was wondering how reasonable the “nerf” was.
1 -
Leaving survivors on the ground to bleed out was never "intended", but killers love to rely on that and waste everyone's time.
Nobody "intended" for killers to stand still in front of a hook and prevent one of the players from participating in a game. But, killers used those mechanics outside of their "intended" purpose and it became "a strategy" (and I use that term loosely).
Nobody "intended" for killers to abuse survivors on hook by being able to hit them over and over. And yet here some killers are, being just as toxic as survivors who abuse with their flashlights.
2 -
Because it is restricting how quickly a survivor can use the flashlight. The numbers don't matter because it's not a debate on how big/small of a nerf it is, it is just a nerf.
1 -
Of all the hills to die on...
3 -
? I think dying on the hill that companies shouldn't weaponise diseases for a good PR stunt because they are receiving backlash everywhere else is a good hill to die on, you dont?
2 -
They also lessened Sadako's visual effects and the menu effects for when he chapter was new. Because people with photosensitivity issues couldn't play. But I guess that was to nerf something and buff killers, and get twitter points. Or something.
4 -
Then where were you literally any other time they've done it in DBD's history? You're specifically latching on to this one change and pretending not to care when people call you out on it. You still never answered how you feel about the Spine Chill fiasco, just that "you'll always do it."
Most of the community understands that all business decisions have more reasons than the ones provided. They generally don't care as long as they are positive and healthy changes. You should have quit this game long ago if you actually cared that BHVR has done this before, and you should probably boycot the vast majority of companies you provide your custom if you care so deeply about it. The rest of us, including the people who this actually affects, will be happy that accessibility was improved instead.
7 -
I can almost understand where OP is coming from, specifically because of the spine chill situation. There was an extremely tone deaf reasoning that was used which paired a good thing (accessibility usage) with a bad thing (side buff that had absolutely nothing to do with the accessibility issue.) I've asked them to comment to try to understand the consistency to their argument, and try to help point out the differences between this situation and that one, as well as how their handling here is an improvement over how they handled it there. They dodged the question though, so they kinda skipped their chance at proving consistency in their argument.
I don't have a whole lot of love for how BHVR has, nor continues to handle a lot of accessability issues in this game. But I also realize its a game that has outgrown its initial scope by more than double at this point, and that they are putting forth efforts in their own way. Some things are easier to make work than others, and positive changes should never be punished, nor should anyone assume current intentions based on past intentions from different people within the same organization.
2 -
Can i ask what your absolute problem is?
I am allowed to question and disagree with what people do, why are you trying to police me on what i should or shouldnt be doing? LMAO
1 -
I've been trying to understand your point, since I have been pretty vocal about my displeasure with how BHVR handles PR in the past. I, like most people, think you're choosing the wrong hill to die on if that actually is your intention.
6 -
Okay and what is it do with you? You are pestering me even though I explained myself handful of times. Can you literally leave me alone, you even went to a different thread from a different user to disagree with me there. Like just leave me alone
1 -
Yeah, thats not exactly the same thing as having multiple conversations on a forum but sure. I'm gonna continue to defend the decision because i put accessibility over your personal cynicism toward BHVR, but I haven't intentionally been singling you out over it. I would be happy to ignore your take, so please stop spamming it everywhere if you don't want responses.
6 -
You can't just grandfather clause flashlights just because it wasn't an issue they were concerned about before. Like cheating, its become an issue recently moreso than years ago, hence them addressing it. Like #########.
3 -
This is basically the only change that make sens on this update
1 -
I think your tinfoil hat is on a bit too tight
5
