Player Entitlement in this community is Unbelievable
Comments
-
That's literally how it was when I started playing dbd.
2 -
When you are at it let killer also see whose in an swf. That way it will kill the game with certainty.
The immediate load in would be nice. One minute less wasted by the indecisive or the last second switchers. No change for me as a casual. I had my mostly fix built and my trusted companions Lightborn (praise be the lord) and franklins (if i felt a little bit nasty).
If i wasn't profile checking out of boredom, i was mostly off screen watching something on my other monitor.
0 -
It hurts more immediately yeah
0 -
Chill, I just made a joke about how people get super worked up whenever someone says "tunneling gens", like you just did.
But out of curiosity, how do you feel about Killers who focus on the one objective they have?
0 -
I’ve stated multiple times that I have no problem with people who camp or tunnel, same with survivors who genrush. If you wanna win, go ahead, but that’s not how I enjoy playing. It’s a game design fault on both sides, and they’re both highly unenjoyable to play against.
It just makes zero sense to me how people are actually appalled that people who play an online game want to win.
1 -
Well, what do you say to killer that lobby dodge, because they see 4 toolboxes? ITs basicly the same, killers just can dc before the match starts because they can act on information they got before, while survivors just receive that information in the match.
But it still is basicly the same.
2 -
40 min against 3 gen killer? no thanks
4 -
And?
1 -
And I repeat my earlier comment to this argument:
Ragequit during the game => ruined match for the rest
Lobby dodge => slightly longer queue time and I would argue the quality of the matchmaking can't get much worse
The dodge MIGHT make the next match unbalanced, the quitter DEFINITELY wasted everybodies time.
5 -
You should know by now that on these forums and Reddit, killer=bad, survivor fun>killer fun. They’ll accuse anyone who disagrees of being a killer main and yell that it’s a killer sided forum when it really isn’t.
*note: I dunno how my post formatted this way and I’m too lazy to figure it out.
2 -
Both are avoiding games they perceive to be challenging or boring. My point anyway was that if survivors had the option to killer dodge in lobby, they absolutely would. They don't have that option, so they do it in game. I'm also not saying it's right or that I agree with it. I'm saying why it happens.
1 -
This kinda formating happens ...
When you put this> here alone in the line.
It mostly happens for me, when I try to do the>_<smiley thing and forget about this formating quirk.
1 -
I don't really have an issue with it because that's what I "grew up" with on DBD.
Is the new system better? Yeah, probably. Would I care if it went back to how it was in 2018? Not really.
1 -
But then the solution is easy: Let survivors know what killer they go against, and let them lobby dodge.
Result: slightly longer queue times, but no more ruined matches. Also, since a lot of hard counters from killers are now removed (calm spirit and doctor might be left, and plague and/or no mither might be an issue), there is not too much to do with that information as survivor. Thus, parity would be restored.
btw, wouldn´t it be entitlement to demand that other players to remain in a match with you, no matter how boring, unfair or whatever you play?
2 -
That would put Stealth Killers in a weaker spot unless the devs buff them accordingly to compensate.
Let Killers see who’s in a swf as well and that’s fine.
0 -
Thank you!
0 -
Knight literally isn't even that good of a 3 genning killer lol.
2 -
Oh boy, I see you people don't read a whole thread before commenting since i had this argument here already.
Survivor all look the same. They are placeholder and neither their perks, the quality of their item nor the size of their premade group (aka solo or 2/3/4 people swf) is really distinguishable outside of steam profiles.killee can't pick specific countermeasures against them except for antiheal, franklins or Lightborn.
Killer on the other hand have their individual powers, play styles and countermeasures, from the mentioned calm spirit/doctor, flashlight/hag, no heal/legion/plague to just picking map offerings against for example stealth killer with open maps or against ranged/rush killer with cluttered maps.
There is no reasonable comparison at all.
And I haven't even talked about the individual popularity of killers and the grave disparity in queue time increase killer player would get based on the character they want to play, NO MATTER THEIR ACTUAL PLAYSTYLE.
4 -
Oh absolutely. Which is a shame. I probably have the reputation of a "filthy killer main" when in reality i play more survivor than killer. But since i don´t agree on the killer bad theme, i´m obviously a killer main.
Our community is really polarized.
3 -
It's not the Killer as to why the survivor should stay in the match; it's the other survivors. They get shafted by the survivor giving up and, as part of a team, being a good teammate means you don't just give up and sabotage your team. Being considerate entails, if other people are counting on you, you do your best to follow through. Not caring if your own team is wrecked by your actions is the entitled attitude.
3 -
I'm confused - do you think I'm arguing in favour of survivors being able to see killers in lobby? Because I haven't said that once. Play the cards you're dealt, whether killer or survivor.
0 -
I had an enraged survivor come into my stream last night after having a bad game and demanded I "take 1/3 responsibility for their last 3 matches" being bad.
I'm still laughing at it. I just said alright well you're being a bit silly and entitled so I'm just gonna ban you.
I'm on Xbox, so after the ban they then started the Xbox messages.
You can't make this stuff up
1 -
Oh yeah, might've missread/-interpreted this part:
My point anyway was that if survivors had the option to killer dodge in lobby, they absolutely would. They don't have that option, so they do it in game
My bad. I set the "option to dodge" equal to "see the killer". And attributed your comment the same tone like the one from Sulaiman in the heat of the moment.
0 -
I feel like this entire post as turned into me endlessly repeating myself. So here I go again.
It is absolutely entitlement that drives players to giving up or DC'ing at the start of a match. It has nothing to do with matchmaking. Although I'd hesitate to call the system that DbD uses put players together "matchmaking". It's more like a slot machine with thousands of potential combinations where getting a balanced game is winning the jackpot.
People who've had a decent amount of time with DbD, like the Ada in my game, should know by now that they will face maps, or killers, or builds that they don't like. Keyword here is "like". It has little to do with balance contrary to the excuses that many will make. And whenever they have to deal with something they don't "like" they will throw a tantrum and make it everyone else's problem.
There's no excuse for this. I know full well that when I play solo que survivor I am probably going to have some really crap games. And when those games happen, guess what? I keep playing through them. I don't make things worse for everyone else simply because I'm not having fun. That's it. End of story. Stop trying to justify the normalization of selfish behaviour as the game's fault. It is 100% the player's fault for continuing to play a game that they don't enjoy, and ruining the experience of other players as a result.
And while you're at it, stop lying about MMR. "Decent MMR", or any type of MMR for that matter, does not exist. I've already made a post with a link to a video detailing how the MMR system really works. And I'm tired of people who keep saying that, "You wouldn't understand because you don't play at the same MMR as me".
EVERYONE PLAYS AT THE SAME MMR.
MMR has only 2 brackets: One for new players, and one for everyone else. There's no attempt to match people together who are similar MMR because the system prioritizes getting into matches quickly instead of creating fair matches.
4 -
You clearly haven't gotten my point since one of the first things I said was, "I do not think people should be forced to keep playing a game they find unfun". Nor at any point in my post do I state, or imply, that I think people are selfish simply because they don't enjoy going against Knight.
My point was, in no uncertain terms: People who give up or DC at the start of games are entitled because they ruin the game for everyone. And this behaviour should not be accepted.
How many times do I have to recite the same point in this thread? It does not matter how you feel. When you boot up DbD you are doing so with the intention of playing with other people. And so a certain level of accountability should be expected from each player. Like not intentionally sabotaging the game for everyone else just because you don't like the killer you're versing.
If you think that's too much to ask then either you're extremely cynical, or are defending what you think is acceptable behaviour.
4 -
"Imagine wanting to play a game with other people and expecting them to play with you. You're so entitled!"
Where do I even start with this abysmal argument?
To start, you're policing what characters people should or shouldn't play. It doesn't matter how fun you find playing against them. They're in the game. They're playable. Deal with it. If you hate a killer so much that you would rather throw a fit and ruin the game for 4 other people, then you shouldn't be playing the game.
If you think that just because you paid for the game that you're entitled to always having fun then you are just proving my point further. It's a multiplayer game. You are expected to play with other people. If you cannot manage the incredibly simple task of not ruining the experiences of every other player in the game the moment something happens that you don't like, then you shouldn't be playing the game
People like you and the Ada, (Whose beliefs you are undoubtedly defending despite what you claim), are among the many people who will repeatedly gaslight other players into thinking that it's completely fine to give up at any time you aren't having fun.
Because when you play a multiplayer game with other people what could be more important than your fun?
If everyone who played DbD accepted the risk of not having fun the game wouldn't magically have all of its problems solved. But the more people think that their experience is more important than everyone else's, the worse the game will be everyone.
Stop promoting selfish behaviour.
6 -
-I'm not policing anything. Nowhere did I tell anyone what to do. If anything I was making it clear NOBODY was policing anybody in this situation, which put to question why we're discussing entitlement to begin with. Already off to a good start with exaggerations and misconstruing what I said. And you're calling my argument abysmal? Like I even made a point to double down on the 'not telling you HOW or WHO to play' and you're still saying I'm policing things? This forum man. This should be enough to settle this, but I'll continue anyway.
-Yeah, no, just because I hate one aspect of a game with a hundred other aspects doesn't mean I should not play it. This is extremely unreasonable.
-People are, believe it or not, entitled to what they do with their time. That doesn't mean what they do is FINE. But to call it entitled in the negative sense, which is what I've been calling you out on because you're 100% misusing that term, is bonkers to me. If they want to be a ######### teammate, so be it, and I'm not actually condoning it but they are absolutely entitled to play how they want. They are NOT entitled to telling you what to do, and you are NOT entitled to having them play the way you want.
-I actually agree, it's unfun. I am NOT defending giving up and DC'ing, and I think the systems put in place help punish these. What I WILL argue against is saying people aren't entitled to do better things with their time. They are. It makes them terrible players and likely need a bigger ban, but they are NOT entitled for going next.
-Gaslighting? You're turning my argument into something it isn't. This is a strawman. Using the word 'gaslight' doesn't change that. And is also incorrect.
-My fun is more important. Doesn't mean I can't be conscious of others. It also doesn't make one entitled (in the negative sense) for wanting to go next. It makes them a whiny little b-. But the use of the term 'entitled' is not only wrong, in my opinion, but makes you appear entitled.
-Your choice of killer is yours, and I will never tell you what to play and how. I will say, however, that if your gameplay is notorious for making the other side have an abysmal time, it should be expected that unfun outcomes will sometimes befall you too. I mean it does on fun killers too, but it'll be more frequent on the former. I'm not saying it's right or good, what I am saying is it is somewhat entitled to expect everyone to just happily play along with your universally disliked gameplay. I'm discussing entitlement, not what's appropriate behaviour. I've always been in favour of bans for giving up, as it is in other games.
I said it in my last post and I'll say it again here: You're NOT entitled to people playing how you want. And it isn't entitled to go next. It's #########, however, yes.
2 -
Let's agree to disagree then.
You didn't address my question though. Imagine if when playing killer you were matched 75% of the time against SWFs switching items and skins at the last minute, with map offering, and got only 25% of other matches that are normal. Would you play every single match? Would you continue playing DBD eventually?
There is, absolutely, MMR in this game. It's extremely poorly implemented and you need to play an insane amount of matches to notice a difference, but eventually you will. If you have less than ~500 hours on survivor, there's a good chance that you are still low MMR, and that's why I'm asking you to confirm you have at least this amount of hours, otherwise, you can't relate with this Ada, because you are not playing against the same killers as her, at least not as frequently.
Post edited by Saiph on2 -
Call me cynical then because expecting accountability from video game players is rather optimistic.
2 -
I mean you can like game even some parts are not for you. Just because you disliked something, this does not mean you will stop play it anyway.
Maybe this Ada loves game but she just dislikes Knight. Just because she will get Knight for time to time, you are suggesting her to stop play? Not makes any sense.
3 -
Nonsense. That'd be reasonable. If you cannot tolerate my mains awful gameplay loop for the other side for the tenth time today, you should uninstall.
No point arguing when they've doubled down on this. This should have been a red flag to me from the start. That and just the sheer amount of assumptions made based of stretches. I tried to be civil, albeit a little cheeky I will fully admit, without attacking the person. But I ended up grouped with the Ada and called a gaslighter (??? that's a crazy accusation, especially if people know what it actually means. Luckily, I'm convinced they do not)
5 -
Gaslighting and narcissism are two terms that people love to use without actually understanding what they mean.
3 -
The thing you saying is not makes sense. We have +30 killers in game atm. And Knight is not popular killer. Just because you hate this unpopular killer, you won't uninstall the game. Because you love other stuffs.
And people know whenever they get killers they don't like or maps they don't like, they can easily give up. This is the same for any online game. You can give up in any online game and then you can go to next match for better exp. This is not bannable , so we can't do anything about it.
1 -
Let's break your points down:
"I'm not policing anything. Nowhere did I tell anyone what to do..."
- Except that you are. You have stated multiple times now that it's completely fine to give up against killers that you find "unfun".
- In doing so, you are setting a standard of which killers are acceptable to give up against, and which aren't. And you know full well that most people will be less inclined to play a killer if the community actively ruins their games.
- You are setting arbitrary rules that you expect others to follow and encourage retribution when your rules are broken. That is called: policing.
"Yeah, no, just because I hate one aspect of a game with a hundred other aspects doesn't mean I should not play it."
- If encountering the one aspect of the game causes you to ruin it for everyone else, then you are a liability to the community and shouldn't be apart of it anymore.
- DbD is a multiplayer game. When you play a multiplayer game you need to accept that other people want to have fun just as much as you.
- If you think that your fun is more important than everyone else's, and you simply cannot fathom why you should have to put up with something for the sake of your fellow players, then you shouldn't be playing the game. Period.
"People are, believe it or not, entitled to what they do with their time. That doesn't mean what they do is FINE. But to call it entitled in the negative sense, which is what I've been calling you out on because you're 100% misusing that term, is bonkers to me."
- People are allowed to do what they want. But they cannot ignore the consequences of their actions. Especially when it involves putting themselves above other people.
- You have continuously defended acting selfishly. Not because you care about what is best for the playerbase, but because you want the way you behave to be acceptable.
- To be "Entitled" is to believe you have been given the right to have or do something. You have made it abundantly clear that you believe your gaming experience is more important than the people you play with.
- You have also stated that you believe your inherently selfish and disruptive actions shouldn't be punished.
- You expect to act in a way that puts yourself above other people, ruins their experience, and don't believe you should be held accountable for it. That is called: being entitled.
"I actually agree, it's unfun. I am NOT defending giving up and DC'ing, and I think the systems put in place help punish these. What I WILL argue against is saying people aren't entitled to do better things with their time. They are. It makes them terrible players and likely need a bigger ban, but they are NOT entitled for going next."
- Except you are. You have stated multiple times that you believe giving up and DC'ing is justified if the individual isn't having "fun".
- You have stated that because you bought the game that you are entitled to having fun. And therefore, always entitled to give up or DC during a game in which you weren't having "fun". Once again putting your "fun" over the fun of others.
- If people refuse to stop doing something that disrupts the experiences of their fellow players then they should be expected to stop or be recognised as a selfish and disruptive player by the community.
- You then backtrack and admit that players who act like this are terrible and should be banned. Yet in the same breath defend these same players for continuing to ruin the games of others.
"Gaslighting? You're turning my argument into something it isn't. This is a strawman."
- "Gaslighting" is to attempt to make someone believe something untrue by using assumptions and false-truths. Examples of your blatant gaslighting attempts include:
1 - Inventing points that I never made and arguing against them to make yourself seem more credible.
From your first comment:
"That is the risk you are taking as killer, and you are NOT entitled for people enjoying or playing the way you want."
I never stated that I wanted people to play a certain way.
From your comment to MikaelaWantsYourBoon:
"If you cannot tolerate my mains awful gameplay loop for the other side for the tenth time today, you should uninstall."
Nowhere did I defend Knight's design. Nowhere did I say or imply that people should be forced to keep playing a game they don't find fun. My main point was always that ruining the games of other players based on how you feel is entitled and selfish.
2 - Lying about your previous points to make my counter-arguments seem unfounded.
From your reply to my rebuttal:
"I'm not policing anything. Nowhere did I tell anyone what to do."
You absolutely were policing what you thought was acceptable behaviour, as I have already proven.
From your reply to my rebuttal:
"If they want to be a ######### teammate, so be it, and I'm not actually condoning it but they are absolutely entitled to play how they want. They are NOT entitled to telling you what to do, and you are NOT entitled to having them play the way you want."
You were absolutely condoning them since the rest of your points are defending and justifying giving up during a game the moment you find it "unfun". And nowhere did I state that people should be forced to play the way I want them to, because I never said people had to play a certain way. My point is, as I keep repeating endlessly, is that people should not be allowed to ruin the game for everyone else because they weren't having "fun".
From your reply to my rebuttal
"Your choice of killer is yours, and I will never tell you what to play and how. I will say, however, that if your gameplay is notorious for making the other side have an abysmal time, it should be expected that unfun outcomes will sometimes befall you too."
Again, you are policing what killers you find acceptable to play against, which I've already gone over. Except now you're ignoring the point I made in my post where I admitted to having lots of unfair, unfun games as Knight. And yet I still played through them. You are acting like playing a game that is known for being unfun, and deliberately ruining the fun of your fellow players, are the same thing. They are not.
From your reply to my rebuttal
"Gaslighting? You're turning my argument into something it isn't. This is a strawman."
Most of your points are just you attempting to gaslight me into thinking I had made points that I hadn't. As I just proved by pointing out just some of the lies you have tried to pass off as real arguments.
I'll now address your most self-incriminating point and leave it at that because I'm tired of having to sort through so many lies.
"My fun is more important. Doesn't mean I can't be conscious of others. It also doesn't make one entitled (in the negative sense) for wanting to go next. It makes them a whiny little b-. But the use of the term 'entitled' is not only wrong, in my opinion, but makes you appear entitled."
- You just straight up admitted to saying your fun is more important. You cannot be conscious of others and think that your fun is more important than theirs.
- You try to shield your point by saying it's just "Your opinion" when you've made it perfectly clear that you believe it to be fact as shown by the constant repetition of the same point throughout your comments.
- You've proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that you're extremely entitled. Your arguments defending your stance have only proven that you care very little if at all about the people you're playing with.
In summary:
- You think it's ok to give up and ruin the games of other players because you care more about your fun than the fun of anybody else.
- You will actively judge and police other players based on how fun you find their character. Which further encourages more games to be ruined in the long-term.
- When pressed on your beliefs you will gaslight others to defend your points because there's no honest way to defend what is ultimately self-centred and disruptive behaviour in a community based around playing with other people.
- You have no idea what the correct uses of the words "Entitled" and "Gaslighting" are. Despite being the embodiment of the former and judiciously using the latter.
If you can't handle not having fun in a game as unbalanced and poorly designed as DbD, then you shouldn't be playing it.
5 -
This game needs higher start and scaling DC penalties. Or simply replace "search lobby" by "reconnect" whilst the trial is still running. We're gonna get bot additions, so their characters dont dissapear anymore, thus they could come back.
2 -
The thing is, behaviour like this isn't tolerated in any other video game's community. But when it comes to DBD, there are ppl that are trying to justify ragequitting/griefing even though it's unhealthy for the game and is def NOT ok.
3 -
it seems you never played against him on rackoon city map in solo q. try it its so much fun(no)
2 -
Sorry I was being sarcastic on that first take. I should've put /s, my apologies.
0 -
lmao they don't want to verse Knight get over it, move on. DBD is a party game not the Olympics.
4 -
This is what I've been saying this entire thread.
How do I like a comment twice?
0 -
Two thing when I play survivor
- Don't care if i'm gonna loose or not, even when I'm the last survivor standing and the trap is close.. I'm gonna play at the very end for trying to survive the longer I can
- . The Only problem with Knight, is that a lot of other player play him for camping the three gen at the beginning... And, Honestly... When I'm against one who try to chase everyone... The chase is ######### cool, I love to try to avoid "two" killer at the same times
You can't be mad against this kind of survivor... We can understand that... When you go against a lot of Knight/skull who only make the three gen strat at the beginning of the game... You don't want to play against him, and you don't want to see if the killer (in this case, you) are going to play like that or not
Recently, the match is a lot like 3V1 because one of the survivor just give up instantly... It's sad.. Insulting is not a solution... But... We can't do nothing at this moment since Knight (and skull merchant) have this kind of notoriety
0 -
This is one of the more reasonable arguments and was a breath of fresh air to read when coming back to this thread. I'll go over what I do and do not agree with.
"1. Don't care if i'm gonna loose or not, even when I'm the last survivor standing and the trap is close.. I'm gonna play at the very end for trying to survive the longer I can"
That sentence alone has earned you my respect.
"2. The Only problem with Knight, is that a lot of other player play him for camping the three gen at the beginning... And, Honestly... When I'm against one who try to chase everyone... The chase is ######### cool, I love to try to avoid "two" killer at the same times"
I won't deny this. Facing a Knight when I'm playing survivor is rare. Facing a Knight that knows how to pressure survivors without camping gens is rarer.
"You can't be mad against this kind of survivor... We can understand that... When you go against a lot of Knight/skull who only make the three gen strat at the beginning of the game... You don't want to play against him, and you don't want to see if the killer (in this case, you) are going to play like that or not"
It's not the Ada that I'm mad at. It's the entitled behaviour that players like her have. It's a tumour on the already sickly body of the DbD community. And it's only grown bigger in recent years.
It's be great if the game was better balanced and didn't allow killers to win games by camping gens. But it unfortunately isn't. And people who throw games because they don't want to deal with that only serve to make the game worse for everyone. As my game showed, even though I had no intention of camping gens and always play as aggressive as possible since that's when Knight is at his strongest, the Ada gave up anyway.
There's no clear solution to any of the problems that DbD suffers from since the devs have proven time and time again that they don't understand their own game. But that doesn't mean that accepting selfish behaviour is a good for the community. It should be rightly scorned and discouraged as it is with almost everyone other online video game playerbase.
1 -
I see people quit out of CoD games, OW QP games and Battlefield games all the time without any sort of punishment.
4 -
Your entire second paragraph is not true at all. Most competitive games do penalize, suspend and outright ban you for that behavior.
2 -
It really doesn't mater in CoD because of the immense potential one individual holds, you leave my lobby and your probably helping me(same for battlefield to an extent). OW both QP and Comp suspend you pretty fast for repeated offences though.
0 -
Pretty sure QP doesn't.
Apex doesn't. Fornite doesn't.
Non-competitive games almost NEVER ban for leaving a lobby.
4 -
There is def some penalty to ow qp and ranked does in apex for sure.
More than anything, a person leaving in dbd is far more detrimental than any of those other games.
I have won quite a few apex games with a rando that left and every once in a while in ow
1 -
Where is the competitive mode in DBD.
Can't say I've seen it.
3 -
Doesn't matter, the affect on the game is far worse.
Although it's probably something we will never agree on as even though I started with cod and halo I moved to league for nearly a decade before I touched dbd whereas I am pretty sure you got into dbd at a far younger age than I did. I consider this game a competitive pvp game regardless of the busted matchmaking and the potential for 4 solos to run into a c33/adren vial blight. This game is not a goof around haha funny party game as many make it out to be. You are trying to win vs other players and the low penalty for dc's combined with ability to leave for free a min into the game makes too many games worthless.
It straight up depresses me when I play killer when a survivor dc's and frustrates me to no end when I am playing survivor. Craziest part is that it happens most to me when I play survivor against a killer not tunneling and not playing some op killer. It's probably because I only play killer after 12AM so survivors are generally far better.
3 -
Overwatch has backfill.
Imagine if leaving an Overwatch QP game caused your team to never get another teammate simply because your teammate didn’t want to play against a Hanzo. It would be miserable, just like DBD or comp Overwatch is.
And even so, if you spend any time in the Overwatch community you can see just how much people hate the amount of leavers in that game. I wish there were harsher dc penalties in QP because I’m sick of someone leaving every game in QP. And I’m tired of having to backfill every second game.
As for CoD and Battlefield I’ve never really played so I can’t really speak for them, but from what I can tell those games aren’t really as team reliant as DBD so a leaver is not as impactful so the penalty doesn’t need to be that harsh.
0
