It really isn't survivors being toxic its killers.
Hi killer main here I'd just like to start off by saying in my 1200 hours of DBD across all 3 platforms the only one which I encountered survivors who were toxic toxic was PS4. Other then on PC i have a solid 300 hours and I've had little to no end game toxicity other then when I play survivor and the killer goes "GG EZ noob team." on my 900 hours on xbox I have received 3 end game anger chats. Thats it. It really isn't survivors being toxic because most things survivors do is well needed to survive the match. Pallet looping, is needed to live, 360's is needed to live sometimes, blinds are meh in needs, DS is a basic perk that I haven't had much problem although that may just be luck, and unhooks and body blocking are just what any altruistic survivor would do. Unless a survivor is tea bagging and constantly flash light clicking they aren't being toxic they're just doing what they can to survive. I don't camp, tunnel, or anything I still get 4 k's at rank 2 and I know you may think you aren't camping or tunneling but waiting for a survivor to get unhooked when you can easily run back and kill them is camping as well. It isn't a free unhook if you're good.
(EDIT)
Yikes people on this forum are more toxic then anyone on the actual game itself like some of y'all need help...
Comments
-
Do you not think there is at least an issue with the number of pallets that spawn into the map? In my experience, it feels like I chew through at least 30 of the damn things and have to spend ages hunting survivors. I'm bearly able to maintain rank 5 so maybe map pressure is just something I haven't mastered yet. My main killer is the clown, if that matters.6
-
You are completely right about the game mechanics. But some people will consider the other side toxic just by playing the game, and that happens on both sides sadly.
My best advise is just to have fun and laugh at those salty players.12 -
The toxicity is caused by people framing everything in terms of killers vs survivors like they're rooting for their favorite bloody football team. I'd wager the vast majority of the playerbase (not the folks on these forums) don't play either side exclusively.
4 -
@irejog said:
Do you not think there is at least an issue with the number of pallets that spawn into the map? In my experience, it feels like I chew through at least 30 of the damn things and have to spend ages hunting survivors. I'm bearly able to maintain rank 5 so maybe map pressure is just something I haven't mastered yet. My main killer is the clown, if that matters.Its not the number its how close they are but don't worry the clown is an amazing loop ender soon enough you'll have no problems chewing through survivors
0 -
Both are toxic.
16 -
Why must you turn this forum into a den of lies?5
-
And both are not.Poweas said:Both are toxic.
Whether someone is toxic depends on a player, not side at which they're playing.
Sure, me and my friends call some surv builds toxic or something we do as killer/surv in kyf, but this is not literal meaning of toxicity. It's more of a joke.
But those are players from both sides who can be toxic, not sides themselves.
5 -
Survivors started it, Killers retaliated in kind, now people who don't know history either claim it's Killers or both sides.
7 -
@Orion said:
Survivors started it, Killers retaliated in kind, now people who don't know history either claim it's Killers or both sides.When I joined the game, which was July 2017 (but I only got into the game in September 2017
) I found only survivors to be toxic but eventually, I became a good player and that's when the toxic killers started to arise. At some point in December 2017, on Xbox, the killers became toxic on Xbox and that's when all the survivor mains, including me became sweaty tryhards and got extremely good. Noowadays, players are relaxed on xbox. That's the xbox dbd history. PC is unknown to me. I consider them both toxic right now though since there's way too much toxic killers and the toxic survivors have died down since Ochido's influence has gone down on the community since everyone has realised he's trash. I knew he was trash for ages but most people thought he was good lol.0 -
Oh, don't you worry, there are plenty of hOchi piDo clones left out there who got the taste of it and now simply have to play as such; they know of no other way to play. And the devs have tended to just give them even more tools to do so as a side effect of trying to level the game out for newer, less-skilled survivors who were admittedly having a rough go of it. Balance for the new, OP bully tools for the sweat shops.
That being said, I've been on the receiving end of a fair amount of toxic killers, as well. The difference seems to be the killers often do it as a means to an end (something that would appear toxic, except it's typically used in order to reach the trial's goal), while the toxic survivors tend to be toxic for toxicity sake (being toxic aside from, and after, reaching the goal).
4 -
Is this bait?
So where to start
1. gg ez is the term used by every egocentric players its never one side if your telling me you never met a survivor who also went gg ez then i want your survivours.Ds kinda promotes killers to hunt other targets that arent carrying it. Which often results in a killer targeting the person off the hook instead of going after the obssesion. If you take a ds regardless of whether or not your behind i question your legitimacy as a killer player. Slugging ds and dribbling is the best solution right now.
Console players are still new to the advanced mechanics a survivour can use to survive. So mechanics like camping and tunneling will not be as important. Camping and tunneling mind you are tools in a killers kit. You dont need em for every game but if players are trying to rush hooks or are making bad saves you need to punish that misplay by downing the unhooked or force them to bodyblock.
My advice dont ever listen to a killer main or survivour main listen to the players who play both. They will give you the fairest assesment of the game and its problems.
8 -
@Jake_Parks_prince said:
Hi killer main here I'd just like to start off by saying in my 1200 hours of DBD across all 3 platforms the only one which I encountered survivors who were toxic toxic was PS4. Other then on PC i have a solid 300 hours and I've had little to no end game toxicity other then when I play survivor and the killer goes "GG EZ noob team." on my 900 hours on xbox I have received 3 end game anger chats. Thats it. It really isn't survivors being toxic because most things survivors do is well needed to survive the match. Pallet looping, is needed to live, 360's is needed to live sometimes, blinds are meh in needs, DS is a basic perk that I haven't had much problem although that may just be luck, and unhooks and body blocking are just what any altruistic survivor would do. Unless a survivor is tea bagging and constantly flash light clicking they aren't being toxic they're just doing what they can to survive. I don't camp, tunnel, or anything I still get 4 k's at rank 2 and I know you may think you aren't camping or tunneling but waiting for a survivor to get unhooked when you can easily run back and kill them is camping as well. It isn't a free unhook if you're good.Ive tried to be a positive guy for the first 600 hours in this game.
After that the survivors managed to break me1 -
@Zarathos said:
Is this bait?
So where to start
1. gg ez is the term used by every egocentric players its never one side if your telling me you never met a survivor who also went gg ez then i want your survivours.Ds kinda promotes killers to hunt other targets that arent carrying it. Which often results in a killer targeting the person off the hook instead of going after the obssesion. If you take a ds regardless of whether or not your behind i question your legitimacy as a killer player. Slugging ds and dribbling is the best solution right now.
Console players are still new to the advanced mechanics a survivour can use to survive. So mechanics like camping and tunneling will not be as important. Camping and tunneling mind you are tools in a killers kit. You dont need em for every game but if players are trying to rush hooks or are making bad saves you need to punish that misplay by downing the unhooked or force them to bodyblock.
My advice dont ever listen to a killer main or survivour main listen to the players who play both. They will give you the fairest assesment of the game and its problems.
I flipped sides because I couldn't handle the sheer amount of camping on survivor my most recent id say 400 hours are all on killer just because survivor became so unfun to play its like I couldn't loop, vault, pallet stun or anything so I juts gave up and said oh well imma main killer now
0 -
@Jake_Parks_prince said:
Hi killer main here I'd just like to start off by saying in my 1200 hours of DBD across all 3 platforms the only one which I encountered survivors who were toxic toxic was PS4. Other then on PC i have a solid 300 hours and I've had little to no end game toxicity other then when I play survivor and the killer goes "GG EZ noob team." on my 900 hours on xbox I have received 3 end game anger chats. Thats it. It really isn't survivors being toxic because most things survivors do is well needed to survive the match. Pallet looping, is needed to live, 360's is needed to live sometimes, blinds are meh in needs, DS is a basic perk that I haven't had much problem although that may just be luck, and unhooks and body blocking are just what any altruistic survivor would do. Unless a survivor is tea bagging and constantly flash light clicking they aren't being toxic they're just doing what they can to survive. I don't camp, tunnel, or anything I still get 4 k's at rank 2 and I know you may think you aren't camping or tunneling but waiting for a survivor to get unhooked when you can easily run back and kill them is camping as well. It isn't a free unhook if you're good.And I have to be a killer main on the most toxic and difficult platform
0 -
Not sure where the survivors “relaxed” but every game I get there are tryhards in. Wether that be 2/4 or even 4/4, I still get a lot of sweatsPoweas said:@Orion said:
Survivors started it, Killers retaliated in kind, now people who don't know history either claim it's Killers or both sides.When I joined the game, which was July 2017 (but I only got into the game in September 2017
) I found only survivors to be toxic but eventually, I became a good player and that's when the toxic killers started to arise. At some point in December 2017, on Xbox, the killers became toxic on Xbox and that's when all the survivor mains, including me became sweaty tryhards and got extremely good. Noowadays, players are relaxed on xbox. That's the xbox dbd history. PC is unknown to me. I consider them both toxic right now though since there's way too much toxic killers and the toxic survivors have died down since Ochido's influence has gone down on the community since everyone has realised he's trash. I knew he was trash for ages but most people thought he was good lol.
. I don’t know what rank you’re at, I’m a rank 4 atm, but you must get good lobbies. Anyways, I’m a killer main, but play my fair amount of survivor as well. 1 -
As survivor or killer, I'm not toxic. I've met toxic killers and survivors, though. The same people trolling newbs and doing swf power teams are the killers bringing in moris and saying "gg ez"
3 -
Damn them for taking away the LOL response.
If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.
4 -
There are way, way more toxic survivors. It's like not even remotely close.
6 -
@Keene_Kills said:
Damn them for taking away the LOL response.If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.
Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.
3 -
Its killers camping and not doing anything else.Its survivor not taking killer seriously and butt dancing.Both sides are toxic as hell and making game not fun for both sides.Killers need some bbq and chilli perkSurvivors need exhaustion on teabagging to learn it is not worth it.Both sides need to know being toxic may be fun for you but if get enjoyment on someone elses pain. Your some f***ed up bully that lame ass hasn't gotten out of elementary school phase.1
-
It's both. The new event is even more toxic. Surviors working with killers, surviors playing favorites and showing where team members are to killers. I've experienced this the last two days and seriously I'm tired of wasting my time trying to leave with a lantern only for a survior to show a killer where I am being hooked then tea bagged by that survior. It's all about greed.1
-
@Blueberry said:
@Keene_Kills said:
Damn them for taking away the LOL response.If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.
Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.
The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".
3 -
@DudeDelicious said:
Never in film, books, or real life is a killer good, noble or fair.
Well they're killers so technically they can't be good but what you say is somewhat wrong.
Jigsaw could be considered 'fair' in that if you escaped he let you go.
Dexter only killed other criminals up until season 5, even after that he targets abusers and criminals. He could be considered a 'good' killer.
And there's a real life serial killer who only targeted criminals.Of course they had the urge to kill other humans and therefore can't actually be good. Maybe that DbD killer who lets someone get the hatch is just made of the same killer material?
0 -
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Keene_Kills said:
Damn them for taking away the LOL response.If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.
Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.
The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".
LOL isn't necessarily a negative reaction, but I can understand if they were having troubles with people abusing it and had to do something to address that. I didn't know that was happening.
0 -
@fluffybunny said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Keene_Kills said:
Damn them for taking away the LOL response.If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.
Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.
The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".
LOL isn't necessarily a negative reaction, but I can understand if they were having troubles with people abusing it and had to do something to address that. I didn't know that was happening.
It was primarily used as a negative reaction, so that distinction became irrelevant. And yeah, it was happening a lot. Some people had their "LOL" count increased by thousands overnight.
The fact that it was being used as a negative reaction wasn't the problem in and of itself, despite what some may claim; it was the abuse and the bots.1 -
@Orion said:
@fluffybunny said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Keene_Kills said:
Damn them for taking away the LOL response.If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.
Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.
The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".
LOL isn't necessarily a negative reaction, but I can understand if they were having troubles with people abusing it and had to do something to address that. I didn't know that was happening.
It was primarily used as a negative reaction, so that distinction became irrelevant. And yeah, it was happening a lot. Some people had their "LOL" count increased by thousands overnight.
The fact that it was being used as a negative reaction wasn't the problem in and of itself, despite what some may claim; it was the abuse and the bots.Did they do that to you, too?
0 -
@fluffybunny said:
@Orion said:
@fluffybunny said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Keene_Kills said:
Damn them for taking away the LOL response.If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.
Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.
The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".
LOL isn't necessarily a negative reaction, but I can understand if they were having troubles with people abusing it and had to do something to address that. I didn't know that was happening.
It was primarily used as a negative reaction, so that distinction became irrelevant. And yeah, it was happening a lot. Some people had their "LOL" count increased by thousands overnight.
The fact that it was being used as a negative reaction wasn't the problem in and of itself, despite what some may claim; it was the abuse and the bots.Did they do that to you, too?
Indeed. It was to be expected, given my high post count.
0 -
@Orion said:
@fluffybunny said:
@Orion said:
@fluffybunny said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Keene_Kills said:
Damn them for taking away the LOL response.If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.
Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.
The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".
LOL isn't necessarily a negative reaction, but I can understand if they were having troubles with people abusing it and had to do something to address that. I didn't know that was happening.
It was primarily used as a negative reaction, so that distinction became irrelevant. And yeah, it was happening a lot. Some people had their "LOL" count increased by thousands overnight.
The fact that it was being used as a negative reaction wasn't the problem in and of itself, despite what some may claim; it was the abuse and the bots.Did they do that to you, too?
Indeed. It was to be expected, given my high post count.
I think I was still pretty new to the forums when LOL was a thing. I only got a couple and I had seen it being used for funny stuff, too, so I just assumed it had multiple uses.
0 -
@fluffybunny said:
@Orion said:
@fluffybunny said:
@Orion said:
@fluffybunny said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Keene_Kills said:
Damn them for taking away the LOL response.If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.
Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.
The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".
LOL isn't necessarily a negative reaction, but I can understand if they were having troubles with people abusing it and had to do something to address that. I didn't know that was happening.
It was primarily used as a negative reaction, so that distinction became irrelevant. And yeah, it was happening a lot. Some people had their "LOL" count increased by thousands overnight.
The fact that it was being used as a negative reaction wasn't the problem in and of itself, despite what some may claim; it was the abuse and the bots.Did they do that to you, too?
Indeed. It was to be expected, given my high post count.
I think I was still pretty new to the forums when LOL was a thing. I only got a couple and I had seen it being used for funny stuff, too, so I just assumed it had multiple uses.
And it did, but those users who chose to abuse the feature by using bots ruined it for everyone else.
1 -
@Orion said:
@fluffybunny said:
@Orion said:
@fluffybunny said:
@Orion said:
@fluffybunny said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Keene_Kills said:
Damn them for taking away the LOL response.If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.
Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.
The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".
LOL isn't necessarily a negative reaction, but I can understand if they were having troubles with people abusing it and had to do something to address that. I didn't know that was happening.
It was primarily used as a negative reaction, so that distinction became irrelevant. And yeah, it was happening a lot. Some people had their "LOL" count increased by thousands overnight.
The fact that it was being used as a negative reaction wasn't the problem in and of itself, despite what some may claim; it was the abuse and the bots.Did they do that to you, too?
Indeed. It was to be expected, given my high post count.
I think I was still pretty new to the forums when LOL was a thing. I only got a couple and I had seen it being used for funny stuff, too, so I just assumed it had multiple uses.
And it did, but those users who chose to abuse the feature by using bots ruined it for everyone else.
This is why we can't have nice things lol
2 -
Both sides can be toxic, simple as that.
People argue that “killers aren’t supposed to make survivors games fun.” Well by that logic, survivors aren’t exactly supposed to make killers games fun either. It’s just sportsmanlike to leave the hook and find another survivor and not farm the person on the hook or simply escape when the chance arises instead of taunting the killer. Both sides aren’t entitled to make the opposing sides game fun but it’s just sportsmanlike to not make their game awful and be a complete douche.
You’ll run into salty killers and survivors. Killers that are mad they couldn’t kill the one Nea that was good at looping so they D/C when the exit gates are powered. Survivors that D/C when they are the first one found.
3 -
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Keene_Kills said:
Damn them for taking away the LOL response.If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.
Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.
The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".
A small minute fraction of the playerbase that was used as a reason for punishing the entire player base..no that was not a good reason for doing away with it. We've already been through this on another page, drop it, we're not going to agree here.
0 -
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Keene_Kills said:
Damn them for taking away the LOL response.If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.
Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.
The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".
A small minute fraction of the playerbase that was used as a reason for punishing the entire player base..no that was not a good reason for doing away with it. We've already been through this on another page, drop it, we're not going to agree here.
It wasn't a minute fraction, which the mods have already said.
0 -
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Keene_Kills said:
Damn them for taking away the LOL response.If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.
Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.
The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".
A small minute fraction of the playerbase that was used as a reason for punishing the entire player base..no that was not a good reason for doing away with it. We've already been through this on another page, drop it, we're not going to agree here.
It wasn't a minute fraction, which the mods have already said.
It WAS a minute fraction, which the mods DID already say.
1 -
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Keene_Kills said:
Damn them for taking away the LOL response.If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.
Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.
The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".
A small minute fraction of the playerbase that was used as a reason for punishing the entire player base..no that was not a good reason for doing away with it. We've already been through this on another page, drop it, we're not going to agree here.
It wasn't a minute fraction, which the mods have already said.
It WAS a minute fraction, which the mods DID already say.
Regardless of what you believe, the minor inconvenience of having to read comments to know if people agree or disagree is worth the trade-off in helping to keep trolls and bots off the forum.
0 -
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Keene_Kills said:
Damn them for taking away the LOL response.If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.
Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.
The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".
A small minute fraction of the playerbase that was used as a reason for punishing the entire player base..no that was not a good reason for doing away with it. We've already been through this on another page, drop it, we're not going to agree here.
It wasn't a minute fraction, which the mods have already said.
It WAS a minute fraction, which the mods DID already say.
Regardless of what you believe, the minor inconvenience of having to read comments to know if people agree or disagree is worth the trade-off in helping to keep trolls and bots off the forum.
You are way understating the value of having both agree or disagree options on topics. I think it isn't even remotely close to being worth that trade off. It's also not just an inconvenience of reading comments. Many people will not comment at all because of the added work of posting or that just don't like to post on the forums. You will be getting a much larger and more accurate sample size from an agree or disagree one click option.
1 -
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Keene_Kills said:
Damn them for taking away the LOL response.If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.
Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.
The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".
A small minute fraction of the playerbase that was used as a reason for punishing the entire player base..no that was not a good reason for doing away with it. We've already been through this on another page, drop it, we're not going to agree here.
It wasn't a minute fraction, which the mods have already said.
It WAS a minute fraction, which the mods DID already say.
Regardless of what you believe, the minor inconvenience of having to read comments to know if people agree or disagree is worth the trade-off in helping to keep trolls and bots off the forum.
You are way understating the value of having both agree or disagree options on topics. I think it isn't even remotely close to being worth that trade off. It's also not just an inconvenience of reading comments. Many people will not comment at all because of the added work of posting or that just don't like to post on the forums. You will be getting a much larger and more accurate sample size from an agree or disagree one click option.
Except you won't be, because of the bots making the feature useless with their spam. Even assuming the bots were a minority, when bad behavior goes unpunished, it spreads like cancer. The bot problem would only continue to grow. This way, you get disagreement in a way that is actually conducive to discussion, as opposed to making a single click and providing zero useful feedback.
0 -
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Keene_Kills said:
Damn them for taking away the LOL response.If you kept a straight face while posting this, you deserve an Oscar nod.
Yeah were basically allowed to do nothing but agree with each other. The PC culture of today at its finest. We can't get a snap shot of the forums opinion on anything now without reading through pages of comments. The Vote Ups are meaningless without a negative option to counter balance.
The problem is that some users were (ab)using bots to make that negative option meaningless by spamming it on everyone whom they didn't like. It has nothing to do with "the PC culture of today".
A small minute fraction of the playerbase that was used as a reason for punishing the entire player base..no that was not a good reason for doing away with it. We've already been through this on another page, drop it, we're not going to agree here.
It wasn't a minute fraction, which the mods have already said.
It WAS a minute fraction, which the mods DID already say.
Regardless of what you believe, the minor inconvenience of having to read comments to know if people agree or disagree is worth the trade-off in helping to keep trolls and bots off the forum.
You are way understating the value of having both agree or disagree options on topics. I think it isn't even remotely close to being worth that trade off. It's also not just an inconvenience of reading comments. Many people will not comment at all because of the added work of posting or that just don't like to post on the forums. You will be getting a much larger and more accurate sample size from an agree or disagree one click option.
Except you won't be, because of the bots making the feature useless with their spam. Even assuming the bots were a minority, when bad behavior goes unpunished, it spreads like cancer. The bot problem would only continue to grow. This way, you get disagreement in a way that is actually conducive to discussion, as opposed to making a single click and providing zero useful feedback.
" Except you won't be, because of the bots making the feature useless with their spam'
That is an extreme minority and hardly an issue even worth weighing in"Even assuming the bots were a minority, when bad behavior goes unpunished, it spreads like cancer."
This is like saying some people stab people with pens so we should ban pens. That's how ridiculous that is. How about we actually solve this rationally and actually I don't know, crack down on bots? Seems much more logical"This way, you get disagreement in a way that is actually conducive to discussion, as opposed to making a single click and providing zero useful feedback."
This is undervaluing a much more large and accurate data set or the times when comments are locked such as patch notes where agree or disagree are the only choices.3 -
@Jake_Parks_prince said:
Hi killer main here I'd just like to start off by saying in my 1200 hours of DBD across all 3 platforms the only one which I encountered survivors who were toxic toxic was PS4. Other then on PC i have a solid 300 hours and I've had little to no end game toxicity other then when I play survivor and the killer goes "GG EZ noob team." on my 900 hours on xbox I have received 3 end game anger chats. Thats it. It really isn't survivors being toxic because most things survivors do is well needed to survive the match. Pallet looping, is needed to live, 360's is needed to live sometimes, blinds are meh in needs, DS is a basic perk that I haven't had much problem although that may just be luck, and unhooks and body blocking are just what any altruistic survivor would do. Unless a survivor is tea bagging and constantly flash light clicking they aren't being toxic they're just doing what they can to survive. I don't camp, tunnel, or anything I still get 4 k's at rank 2 and I know you may think you aren't camping or tunneling but waiting for a survivor to get unhooked when you can easily run back and kill them is camping as well. It isn't a free unhook if you're good.Yeah, your pretty obviously not a killer main or even 50/50 player if you think half this stuff...Until we see Killers posting for people to ######### in mass, then claiming killers are the most toxic is not gonna ever be true...
This was one hell of a bad attempt to even try making yourself sound like an even 50/50 player...
2 -
Number 2 is so true.Zarathos said:Is this bait?
So where to start
1. gg ez is the term used by every egocentric players its never one side if your telling me you never met a survivor who also went gg ez then i want your survivours.Ds kinda promotes killers to hunt other targets that arent carrying it. Which often results in a killer targeting the person off the hook instead of going after the obssesion. If you take a ds regardless of whether or not your behind i question your legitimacy as a killer player. Slugging ds and dribbling is the best solution right now.
Console players are still new to the advanced mechanics a survivour can use to survive. So mechanics like camping and tunneling will not be as important. Camping and tunneling mind you are tools in a killers kit. You dont need em for every game but if players are trying to rush hooks or are making bad saves you need to punish that misplay by downing the unhooked or force them to bodyblock.
My advice dont ever listen to a killer main or survivour main listen to the players who play both. They will give you the fairest assesment of the game and its problems.
If I see someone rush an unhook and the person unhooking has DS then sorry but I'm going for the injured guy. I'm all for giving people a chance when unhooked but I'm not going to screw myself over by wasting time chasing someone to get no hook out of it.
Other survivors have to suffer because baby wants his crutch perk. Reason #342 why it's an awful, toxic perk.0 -
Other survivors have to suffer because baby wants his crutch perk. Reason #342 why it's an awful, toxic perk.
or you could hear me out...realize its less toxic then NOED and very easy to deal with. Reason #500 why everyone hates us killers.
1 -
@AlexAnarchy said:
@Jake_Parks_prince said:
Hi killer main here I'd just like to start off by saying in my 1200 hours of DBD across all 3 platforms the only one which I encountered survivors who were toxic toxic was PS4. Other then on PC i have a solid 300 hours and I've had little to no end game toxicity other then when I play survivor and the killer goes "GG EZ noob team." on my 900 hours on xbox I have received 3 end game anger chats. Thats it. It really isn't survivors being toxic because most things survivors do is well needed to survive the match. Pallet looping, is needed to live, 360's is needed to live sometimes, blinds are meh in needs, DS is a basic perk that I haven't had much problem although that may just be luck, and unhooks and body blocking are just what any altruistic survivor would do. Unless a survivor is tea bagging and constantly flash light clicking they aren't being toxic they're just doing what they can to survive. I don't camp, tunnel, or anything I still get 4 k's at rank 2 and I know you may think you aren't camping or tunneling but waiting for a survivor to get unhooked when you can easily run back and kill them is camping as well. It isn't a free unhook if you're good.Yeah, your pretty obviously not a killer main or even 50/50 player if you think half this stuff...Until we see Killers posting for people to [BAD WORD] in mass, then claiming killers are the most toxic is not gonna ever be true...
This was one hell of a bad attempt to even try making yourself sound like an even 50/50 player...
Im literally like a 30/70 main?????? Because I have an actual valid opinion im not? lmao okay go off I mean everything I said is true I play killer more now because i've had an easier time playing killer then I ever did as survivor sure i've had challenging games where I got bullied but everyone has thats why I made this post like just get over it killers are more toxic then survivors.
0 -
"My experience is the only truth, anyone saying anything else is wrong because it didn't happen to me so it can't be true."
You really believe 80% of the lobby isn't toxic?
You're heavily underestimating this game's toxicity.3 -
I don't want to get in a huge argument or anything, but how does body blocking seem fair? To me, that's the most toxic thing there is, especially on hooks.
0 -
@Boss said:
"My experience is the only truth, anyone saying anything else is wrong because it didn't happen to me so it can't be true."
You really believe 80% of the lobby isn't toxic?
You're heavily underestimating this game's toxicity.I'm just saying most killers call toxicity way to fast like if a survivor loops them its considered toxic, if a survivor flash light saves its toxic, pallet stuns = toxic hell just doing gens is literally considered toxic! And then the killers get mad and DC or camp or tunnel even if the survivor wasn't truly being toxic.
0 -
Both sides can be toxic when they are angry at the game or the players. I know for sure that I had moments of toxicity and saying things that I shouldn't have said while playing either side. It's not just killers and not just survivors, it's everyone. And it's not just in DBD.
0 -
@Jake_Parks_prince said:
@Boss said:
"My experience is the only truth, anyone saying anything else is wrong because it didn't happen to me so it can't be true."
You really believe 80% of the lobby isn't toxic?
You're heavily underestimating this game's toxicity.I'm just saying most killers call toxicity way to fast like if a survivor loops them its considered toxic, if a survivor flash light saves its toxic, pallet stuns = toxic hell just doing gens is literally considered toxic! And then the killers get mad and DC or camp or tunnel even if the survivor wasn't truly being toxic.
I disagree.
Well, i disagree with you saying most Killers think that way.
I can't say you're wrong about the Killers you face, maybe you're just unlucky.Anyway, i myself rarely encountered a Killer who complains after the match.
Heck, most Killers i faced almost never spoke post-match.
Not saying they don't exist, just saying i can't relate to over 50% at least are toxic Killers.0
