The Only Way To Make Dbd Grow
I've been thinking a lot these past few weeks and I really think this might be the only true solution to fix the game and put it in a good spot. tried brainstorming for hours with multiple people but this just makes the most sense.
Comments
-
I really think this might be the only true solution to fix the game and put it in a good spot.So let's start with the premise: is DbD in a bad spot? The video highlights content creators expressing frustrations and a host of negative reviews at the end.
On the other hand, it has had a stable player base for a few years, the overall review trend still seems to be positive, and by all accounts from the Devs they find the game to be in a very healthy place (which probably is a polite way of saying 'making money').
The game is stagnant and likely on a slow decline, but I think it is highly unlikely that you could change that with a game of DbD's age. If they did think they could rework the game into a much more popular version I suspect it would be in a DbD 2 system.
Okay, so just as a hypothetical, would a point based system be better?
It comes up from time to time, I've suggested it myself. It definitely has appeal. Balancing the game would probably be easier, but not quite as easy as the video makes out. It would likely destroy the idea of a meta and create more build variety.
However I think there are a number of negatives that would also occur:
1: It's just not DbD's Design - One of the appeals of DbD is that it is not like other games. This means they buck a lot of conventional wisdom, which causes frustration, but also allowed them to create a very unique game.
By design, players are allowed to play sweaty builds that are superior to other builds. Like the different rarity addons for example - obviously some are superior, but the balancing metric is supposed to be their rarity. Now, I loathe the way addons work more than I could describe here, but the way blood points and character advancement work the game is built around that concept. You'd have two different balancing metrics running into each other.
The other factor is that BHVR has much more confidence in the MMR system than most of the playerbase does. Let's say we had a player who was a six (ten point scale), they could make themselves a 5 or 7 on the build and MMR would sort them out. Okay, obvious question, why let them make themselves weaker or stronger in the first place? Arguably, it creates game variety.
The other day playing survivor I got matched against a Skull Merchant who used a map offering and a build specifically meant for that map - as a player they were pretty bad and it was clear they were only there because of the build. But this also means I have games were I hit perkless Nurses/Blights who are amazing players but are handicapping themselves. Now maybe the perk variety created by a point system would be superior to this, but I could easily see it stagnating.
2: DbD is a guessing game - This to me is the biggest issue and one I think a lot of people miss. Many perks (and playstyles for that matter) gain their power based upon a presumption of what the other side will do. Now, this is true for any game, but in DbD it is a massive game component. It's why self-care is an S Tier perk on Asian server and USA and Europe looking at it as throwing the game because the approach to the game is very different (thus trying to ascribe it a point value would be very difficult).
This means a meta is not inherently problematic so long as it can be countered. Saboteur is a pretty bad perk, but if the killer ends up running Pain Res it can become very strong as you can deny an early pain res (and potentially a hook entirely). Calm Spirit and Distortion are either incredibly powerful or useless depending on the killer build. The value of perks is totally related to the probability of what is brought on the other side - that means many perks can't be balanced without the concept of certain perks being stronger or weaker.
6 -
I have two thoughts
- The reviews in the video are hilarious and mostly seem to be people who are primarily survivor players who are angry the game is no longer a bully simulator, I don't think any healthy version of this game would appeal to these people so it discredits the idea there's a problem in the first place. Granted the game does still have it's issues I just think it's a bad idea to include reviews that people mostly rage posted to support his point.
- Regardless a point based build system is intriguing but I am skeptical it would change anything, maybe the meta would change but there would likely still be a strict meta as we're in an age of gaming where everything gets optimized within weeks so I'm struggling to see how it would meaningfully change anything.
5 -
The way to make it grow is to have one player mostly win and four players mostly lose instead of a fair 50-50 shot for all.
BaLaNcEd ClAp
0 -
DBD would be in a good spot if killers can play fair and get 60% kill rate. Which its really possible by the current balance.
Its only that killers want 100% kill rate so they tunnel with their (suppose to have 60% kill without tunneling) strength.
Devs could make Huntress holds 7 iri hatchet basekit and that will not stop the tunneling.
The only way to make DBD grow (if you mean in players) is to cut off tunneling so more people would play.
3 -
The Only Way To Make Dbd Grow is to hire devs who actually play their game :)
2 -
Couldn’t agree more. Tunneling has been accepted as a play style that literally robs a player from playing the game, which I believe is wrong and unfair. (And it of course damages the rest of the team too, that’s why tunneling works so well it doesn’t just affect the 1 player that got tunneled out) The Devs need to make tunneling no longer the most optimal/easiest way to win. And of course it’s so damaging for newer players who don’t know how to loop yet, and don’t have the anti-tunnel perks that you have to pay for or wait to pop up in the shrine.
0 -
The only way to make DBD grow (if you mean in players) is to cut off tunneling so more people would play.
I don't think that would help DBD grow. It would maybe help (slightly) with the deteriorating player base but it doesn't bring in or hold new players.
0 -
Ima tldr but having a stable player base is bad that's why I said grow.
0 -
thats fair
0 -
Hot take: DBD is in a good spot right now. That’s how I feel.
1 -
I dont know if they can get more new players. But not letting players stop playing the game also increase the player count.
And veteran players buying skins if they keep playing the game. While newbie buying chapters.
I have friends to play with in other games, they told me that they want to play DBD with me since they saw me draw DBD alot. I told them not to play. We have 1h and a half to play everyday, I dont want them to be slugged for 4min. Or play the game for 3min then tunneled out then wait for 10min to play again.
3 -
Id have to disagree I bought the game for 20 people 2 stayed the other 18 quit because they get tunneled and are out of the game after 2 min and have to wait 15 to play again. I understand me having hours puts them in a bad mmr but they wont play the game period unless I play with them. So the easiest solution is to figure out how to fix tunneling or op killers for new players instead of people just saying git gud. Choys solution I think fixes it it will also stop slow gen rushing.
2 -
Ima tldrThat's fine, but its kind of hard to have a discussion on the pros and cons of game design without at least a few paragraphs.
but having a stable player base is bad that's why I said grow.It's a live service model, a stable player base is a good place to be.
I'd also say growth is just generally unrealistic. The game engine is old, the code and graphics take prior generation consoles into consideration. If there was to be a surge in players it would require a substantial redesign of many elements. Which will happen inevitably, (I imagine like 5 to 10 years) but if we're talking that level of change we're way past a point based perk system.
0 -
I don't think so all my friends want to play but say the game is unplayable because of tunneling the 2 matches they don't get tunneled they have a lot of fun. When the killer tunnels they just want to go play cod. Its not that complicated a game that has 100k players boom in from 20k should have a better player base the problem is not the content like games like new world or pal world the problem is that this game became to sweaty.
1 -
When the killer tunnels they just want to go play cod.But how would a point based perk/addon system change that?
0 -
Killers biggest excuse is that they are forced to tunnel with the point system you could make it possible where the gen perks or the toolboxes cost a bunch of points limiting what else the survivor can do in chase or in other end game situations to make it where the killer dosent feel like they have to tunnel.
0 -
You can't make the game grow beyond a certain point. Most players want to play survivor, and are stuck in solo queue. They'll have constant matches of teammates going 4% or disconnecting, or they'll get tunneled out by the killer, find it miserable and quit.
This game is only suited to people who want to spend hundreds of hours learning the game through trial and error, and dealing with the most miserable tactics along the way. In other words, this game is built for almost nobody.
0 -
Well the game had 100k people now has like 29 30 and thats from poor game mechanics. yes you can make games grow it happenes all the time.
0 -
The game brought in players with big licenses like Resident Evil. But once people realised what the gameplay loop is like they eventually left.
1 -
Some left from that MMR made 90% leave. Like I said bad game mechanics because mmr incentivizes things like tunneling and gen rushing so you never gain skill. Have a skillful game and more people stay pretty simple concept.
0 -
This game has never been good at retaining players. It's just not built for casual players to have fun. It's not just the MMR system.
0 -
Exactly and im saying this will help.
0 -
The only way this game could grow it's playerbase and retain them would be if the game was actually welcoming to new players.
This system could work in DBD, but it would not benefit newer or more casual players. Their experience would still be miserable.
1 -
I don't think so honestly it would stop some of the oppressive meta (obviously there will be a new meta but hopefully not as oppressive) I think this is really worth a try as a test for a month on the ptb.
0 -
This won't help at all. What's needed is better matchmaking and a playerbase mindset shift. Survivors need to be more willing to learn the game and try instead of suiciding and killers need to stop tunneling and camping obviously new players (and a lot less in general, but especially against new players).
0 -
It won't stop new survivors getting wiped out because they don't understand the game. It won't stop survivors getting singled out and tunneled. It might stop some players from leaving, but it won't help the game retain newer players, which it needs to do if it wants a thriving playerbase.
I (as someone who has like seven hundred hours on the game) would love a system like this. But it's not enough to bolster the playerbase.
0
