Don't do that, it's not fun for the other side!
So what the title says. Tunneling is bad. It's not fun for survivors. We all know this.
Thing is, you know what's not fun for killers? Being stunned and chain blinded with extended duration blindness at every pallet. Yet, seems that when a killer main says that is unfun, survivors either don't care, or mock them.
It's not up to me to make sure the game fun for you, just as it is not up to you to make sure then game is fun for me.
In the end, IMO we all should follow The Golden Rule… Do unto others as you would have done unto you.
If as a killer you are so gung ho that you would never be a 'bully" to killer, then play survivor. Don't be the bully.
If as a survivor you are so gung ho that you would never tunnel, then play killer. Don't tunnel.
See things from the other side for awhile.
Comments
-
Wanting a game where your opponent puts respect for their opponent is idealism. Preparing yourself for it when it doesn't happen is realism. They're not necessarily mutually exclusive, and honestly we all need more of both.
15 -
Oh, I agree completely and that's how I play myself. I rarely tunnel or slug unless the survivors are just being dumb (like if you are going out of your way to bodyblock me even when I am going after another survivor, get your Decisive Strike value, then yeah I will immidiately down and hook you again when I recover from the stun. Also Boil Over. I have PTSD from the RPD library and will unapologetically tunnel anyone running Boil Over.) But I don't expect every killer to play by my rules when I am on survivor. Same with survivor, I don't do the flashlight blind at every pallet thing myself, but I don't get angry at survivors who do. (On the other hand, survivor side I am a Claire Redfield main and run Blast Mine with Residual Manifest, I find it hilarious and when I get hit by a Blast Mine as killer, my thought is "Respect." )
4 -
Yet, seems that when a killer main says that is unfun, survivors either don't care, or mock them.
Source?
-12 -
that's why the pallets was shrunk to let the killer wipe out every survivor.😅
-3 -
I love and agree with this post. I wish players would just stop fighting and just respect eachother
6 -
I made a suggestion before about how chain blinding shouldn't be a thing - after a successful blind killers, by default, should get a mini Lightborn effect that lasts a number of seconds to prevent this kind of thing.
4 -
I completely agree with you about basic respect and the golden rule. The game and honestly the world as a whole would function much better if people lived by that thinking.
But I don’t think tunneling is comparable to being stunned or chain-blinded. If anything, the game would be healthier if tunneling worked more like those mechanics. Stuns and blinds are limited resources. pallets disappear once they’re used, flashlights burn through charges, etc.
Not enjoying getting stunned or blinded is totally understandable , and people mocking that isn’t fair. The annoyance between stuns and tunneling might be similar but they’re definitely different kinds of annoyances.
If tunneling was balanced the way stuns and blinds were, DBD would probably be in a far better place. Especially if anti-tunnel tools worked like Lightborn does for blinds.It would be no paywall, no activation conditions, no cooldown, no limited charges. Just consistent protection.
But yeah, everyone should always keep in mind that they’re playing with other people, and that should mean something. Nobody should ever mock anyone else.
7 -
I don't tunnel as killer or use flashlights as survivor. It has yet to make people treat me any better.
16 -
This.
Also, I'm not here to tell anyone how to play.
I'm here to tell the devs: "hey, the 'optimal way' to play your game kinda sucks when taken to extremes, maybe you should put some limits on that".
But nuance is completely lost on a lot of people, some people hate any change, and a small number of people really, really love doing it because it sucks.
13 -
This thing about these statements are true but ive seen in this game that it truly doesn't matter how you play.
If you play fair and Lose: GGEZ Noob
If You Win fair: ur So Bad
If you Lose Sweaty: uninstall and End Urself
If you Win Sweaty: Try Hard Scumbag
This goes from both sides of the game. So i say play how you want because it just doesn't matter
4 -
Some people will always be mad. Want an example?
Yesterday I play my Chucky and I went for the 8 hook before Killing style.
So i had 6 hooks without tunneling but I never found the Claudette. So I searched her, found her and hooked her. Left the hook going to pop a gen. Claudette gets unhookd, healed hides again. I come back because I need her for 8 hooks. Get her again.
Claudette died to the 11th hook in this game.
Endgame chat:
Claudette: Noob Killer can´t win without hardcore tunneling.
Me: Excuse me… you had 2 gens left when you all died.
Claudette: Yeah because its impossible to win a 3v1 if you tunnel at 5 gens.
7 -
I have just one rule as killer. Flashlights are fair play, but if you run Head-On, don't be sad or mad if I mori you. That perk is not fun to go against.
Also, you won't see me run a flashlight on survivor, unless I am there to meme with a silly build to boot.
Heck, I don't even run Exhaustion/Finesse and those kinds of perks, because I know how annoying it is to face.
The only perk I run to slow the killer down is Blast Mine, but that is a rather harmless perk in the grand scheme of things. I just laugh it off if I get hit by one when playing killer.
Though I have seen people tilt off the face of the planet from getting hit by a single blast mine.6 -
Blast mine is my eye rolling perk as Killer. XD
-2 -
Play nice and get teabagged, no thanks. Dead Survivors can't teabag.
-6 -
We already have it in game - it's called mouse movemnt, you either look up or down.
4 -
I thought about that too but in the scenario of 'bully squads' with multiple flashlights, looking up or down will only get you so far before being blinded again in quick succession.
-1 -
A) If I’m gonna be “kind” to other player, they are no guarantee this “kind” attitude will be returned from other player
B) This is a damn game and you yourself responsible for bringing fun solely for yourself after all
C) Are we following moral codex in game about killers and survivors?
I keep it simple - everything that happened in match shouldn’t go beyond gameplay. So no agressive BM, hostaging, sandbags, threats, offences. If game meant to stun and blind, I’ll do this as survivor. If game meant to kill, I will kill no matter how unfun and fast it would be seemed. It’s a game. Let people choose how to play and that’s all. There are too much noise about how unfun specific stuff is, and it always a perspective of person from other side who didn’t meant to enjoy this from the start. It’s PvP after all.Handicapping by “you should play nice first of all” gonna bring opposite reaction from the person you telling to do so
-5 -
It's enough to be on this forum for long enough…
6 -
While I do understand the point and think it's broadly good to consider both sides, and even think there's some conversations to be had about chain blinding and if it could potentially be adjusted, it's a mistake to only focus on tunnelling being unfun.
It's true that tunnelling is often unfun the same way chain blinding is often unfun, but there's another element to consider- tunnelling is also unbalanced, and chain blinding isn't.
That is the more important element of tunnelling and should always get first billing in discussions about it, often even the only thing that should be discussed. Fun is subjective and therefore difficult to engineer, but balance has firmer footing to discuss and tunnelling clearly trips that wire, so to speak.
To tie it into your larger point, true, neither side has the responsibility for the other side's fun… but the developers do, and they also have a responsibility to ensure matches are generally as fair as possible.
12 -
They see it as a problem because they think that is why most players are quitting according to their completely survivor sided exit survey. if they lose 100 survivor players and 1000 killer players, but they only ask questions about why the survivors are quitting… they just have 1100 players quitting for survivor reasons, even though many of them are not quitting for those reasons. Change the numbers however you want, the data is still wrong.
-5 -
Frankly I just try to play efficiently and win, since I get yelled at periodically no matter what I do or how I play anyways.
1 -
If survivor blinds you and killer comes from breaking animation looking down takes some time and smart survivor will still crouch and blind you because for chain blind the time it takes to apply that blind is like second maybe even less so you cant kinda doge first chain blind mostly but third one and others you can.
0 -
I've been on these forums for ages, and I don't see people respond to chain hook denial complaints like that.
Mostly because I don't see people complain about chain hook denial in the first place, except 6 pages deep in a forum trench war about anti-tunnel.
And it's really frustrating, because I think it's a valid complaint, it's awful for gameplay in much the same way tunnelling is, and I think this is one particular thing that could be addressed that would hit the seal-team-6 swiffers harder than solo-queue. But the only time it's ever brought up, it's not because people want it fixed, but it's always to complain about survivors getting something fixed on their end.
Even this post, if you ignore the 'as the title says', the very first sentence just leans into the discussions around tunnelling.
It's never an argument of 'Fix this issue', it's always more in the direction of 'Don't fix survivor issues, because this killer issue exists'.
And that's what gets the animosity.
9 -
No, the point is any "fix" is going to not be liked by the other side because most players that speak up are not thinking of the other side's fun, only their own. A great example is awhile ago they made it harder to get saves out of a locker with a flashbang grenade. It can still be done but its a lot harder. When it was changed, there were tons of survivors here on the forums complaining that BHVR had ruined their fun.
-4 -
As someone who has also been here for a long time, I have also never seen the outcry of people defending something like hook denial.
I've never seen anyone saying you can't take hook denial away because "it's the only way to win", or "don't punish me for using the optimal strategy", or even "it's a game mechanic, so clearly it's fair game and completely intended as the only strategy I need".
(And, since nuance is completely lost on some people, if there is someone who has posted something like this, it's a single individual that quickly fades into the background. There isn't a huge traction or even a loud, but small, group that feels this way. Most posts about any "objective denial" are in agreement that it sucks for everyone.)
And as much as I don't particularly care for "abandon" as a good solution, this is one of the few cases where it was implemented that isn't controversial. Since "not completing a gen in 10 minutes" is pretty much limited to bully squads.
In fact, the only complaints I've ever seen about the abandon option were right as it launched, when the system incorrectly showed a 4k on the end game screen when this was triggered, where killers would use even the limited 8 kicks to hold the game hostage for 10 minutes and "win by abandon". Which, thankfully, seems to have disappeared once they fixed the end game screen for that situation.
But none of that applies to tunneling. Some people are tunneling apologists, and others seem to believe tunneling is some kind of lifestyle, and defend it using any and every kind of manipulation tactic possible, from gaslighting, whataboutism, and even "nice game you've got here, be a shame if anything happened to it".
6 -
If you don't like tunneling, you shouldn't complain! You should just play something else!
Oh, wait, that's what all the casual survivors DID, which is why you get bully squads (and long wait times).
But, maybe they'll come back if you explain how their fun isn't your responsibility. That sounds like an enticing offer.
6 -
This content has been removed.
-
im with ya there. Play the way you want and respect your opponent to play how they want
2 -
We can not compare tunneling to stunning the killer. Blinding at a pallet doesn't even create distance unless you're using a specific flashlight addon. And even then it's not much. Meanwhile tunneling out one player is not only unfun for the person being tunneled, it effectively guarantees the killer a win. I mean, we all know tunneling out one survivor early is the easiest way to win as killer in DBD.
2 -
They've been saying slugging and tunneling are valid strategies for years. Now, supposedly many survivors players are quitting, suddenly slugging and tunneling are a problem they need to fix?
As for play the other side, yes many players do. But many players do not. Everyone that does play both sides always gets up in arms when we say to play both sides, but if you do, then we are not talking about you.-1 -
I never bring flashlights, yet it doesn't stop me from being tunneled. I rarely tunnel, yet it doesn't stop the survivors from being toxic. There is only one moral rule in this game: always assume the enemy is toxic, or be disappointed. It's better to receive salt for hard tunneling than to be mocked after playing "fair".
1 -
well it's been a one way street for years.just remember the only reason flashlights got nerfed back in the day is because a dev got bullied on stream
3 -
you have ears (i hope functional) or you can not be stunned in the first place.
doesnt require 1k hour and map knowledge to replicate compared to tunneling.-1 -
they also defended face-camping for years because camping with huntres iri-hatchet was "such exicting gameplay"
but yeah, they will never have the courage to even ATTEMPT to change or combat against these things, so i wouldnt worry about it.-2 -
Or just… I dunno… look up?
-1 -
One thing you'll find, and it's been like this since day one in 2016, is that anything survivors do that killers don't find fun is perfectly fine and okay because "they're just trying to survive".
If the killer tries to win and survivors don't like it, we need base kit handholds to make that more difficult. People who disagree are biased and don't have a real opinion because they don't know the history of the game.
0 -
true and real king
0 -
You can play how you want, but all that sauce put on it is just being petty and extra.
1 -
Really? I thought it was the other way around. Killers are allowed to complain all they want, and their issues get fixed. Meanwhile, Survivors are told to suck it up and "get gud."
5 -
Pretty much from antifacecamp,antitunnel and now antislug in some way is deffinitely on its way, unhook protection. Killers got only global buff in patch 6.1.0 where their all cooldowns like from breaking,weapon cleaning and vaulting got little shorter like 10-20% (weapon cooldown after m1 was 3 seconds and nowdays its 2.7 seconds) and pallet situation it was for both sides so I doesnt count it (first it was bad for killers and then nerfed for survivors so this change is kinda even because it went for both sides and all were bad).
I havent seen any idea like basekit dead lock when gens pop too fast after each other or some things like that so yeah pretty accurate.
-5 -
"They" in my post was not meant as an absolute, I was talking about the developers. Sorry I wasn't more obvious, but I figured that rest of my post being about the developers changing their tune made it obvious.
1 -
Most of your post seemed to be predicated on your mistaken impression of who I meant by "they" and so therefore I didn't feel any of it warranted a rebuttal. That, and I am in a particularly foul mood right now and saying too much about anything might catch me a ban.
1 -
If being for real, all my friends came for FNAF chapter and left really soon. They didn't even try the killer role. Only one person tried Legion once for 2vs8 for me, failed and said this game is not for them.
I think we never would have more clarity over stats and any other analytics, so discussion around this topic never won’t stop being more about a person believing their struggles, position, and frustration are absolute
When in reality u are rather gonna see a case where if a person agrees with you in one place, that doesn't mean they're gonna share your overall sentiment.
It matches well the whole thing why moralizing or claiming for fun or kindness is a bad idea from the start, because what fun for you is a boredom for other in the game
1 -
They didn't understand basically anything. Too complex for no motivational explanation, unintuitive, yet zero progression. Tutorial doesn't explain anything. What is perks, why killers are so different, why they so fast? Why I can’t defend? Why they have interesting abilities and me not? What the point of bying new surv if it's just a skin? And a lot of stuff like this.
They called game ugly looking as well.There was no reason to complain on genrush/tunneling/role being op, because they even didn't went to a stage of understanding anything related to macro. I mean you can complain on it, but in reality you doing so because it’s a faster and simple way to find guilty guy in a room. And if u heard this word accidentally in EGC or from your friend, you start using this argument a lot.
They also found graphics and technical state kinda… meh. “Clunky and nothing feel smooth”. My attempts to teach them in customs went really bad, because I myself was inexperienced pretty a lot at that stage. Like a 300 hours baby XD.
I was pretty lucky starting observing DBD through media before, and I ended up in kinda middle of chill and competitive play. No “real comp”, but players try to win a lot. It helped me to stay longer than them. My background to games and personal interest to assym genre (cause I’m study dev) helped me to get 800 hours and get results above average (if count dev stats as average, because like my surv stat for whole time is solid 42%, when over 70% of matches there went as solo q with 120 ms . So yeah, after changing region for better ping and watching few more tutorials I stopped finding game hard for some role.
My friends from graphics was from a world of party games enjoyers. Their attitude and experience showed me why DBD never was party/casual game from the start.
This game doesn't have any set up for being actual party game. So what we call casualty here is simply a level of deny to actually play for win or skill issue. Skill issue not in terms of offence, it’s simply needed to admit you need to know too much to get satisfied result if don’t want RNG screwing you. Why actual motivation for it? Nothing. Even for comp.
So, my personal opinion it is a kinda of middle? There are no ground for game being casual or chill. You playing in broken set up and find reason to keep doing so. And licences is the only way to keep casual mass, when balance issue is the reason for more experienced players. This game attracts people for being poorly designed, or they get excited by event/DLC for month and then quit.
2 -
As person who myself started as fan of SH and Scream franchise I was pretty disappointed tbh. I’m resting now… but sometimes wish a lot to return to DBD, even if I promised doing so at the end of January. Truly abusive relationships.
I could trade a lot if game went more far and even having twice less franchises, but every of them was a mini story setting. With more complicated mechanics than gens, well thought maps, abilities for survs, own atmosphere. Solid technical base and good tutorials. Something like in Outlast Trials, maybe more simplified in sake of keeping PvP.
Even if it was my favourite franchise being remoced. I wouldn’t mind to lose SH content to see everything I mentioned above, but it’s just a phantasy and even players wouldn’t share same opinion, I’m sure
0 -
Wholeheartedly agree. Unfortunately you can't trust a community to always play respectfully, and it's a vicious cycle. Survs struggle to survive games and will either take out their frustrations on killers when they do get the upper hand or play killer themselves and vent frustration that way. And killers will come up against swf sweat squads, get bullied and then take that into their next game.
Not really much of a solution for that. My personal suggestion would be to split casual and ranked games. Ranked games are for the competitive players to earn rewards with skill based mm so the hardcore players can get their fix.
And a casual playlist with a system to match players based on their attitude. Main argument against this solution is that sweaty players will simply play the casual playlist for easy games. So introduce a reaction system similar to the existing one. But have it prompt players to vote a reaction at the end of each trial for each other player. Give it various different boxes to tick depending on the players playstyle: helpful, casual, hardcore, friendly, aggressive. And match up players together based on the reactions they accrue. Not fool proof obviously but I can't see it harming the play state more than the current attitudes do
-1 -
Tunneling is unfun for survivors but sometimes its necessary
yea survivor mains (the entitled ones) are always quick to express what the killers do that isnt fun for survivors but have no problem doing things that arent fun for killers and when confronted about it they say to git gud or say its part of their objective.
Exactly! The survivors fun isnt the killer's job and vice versa.
I dont ever expect survivor to play in such a way thats fun for me. They play how they want, just as I play Killer how I want.
People need to just stop telling the other side how to play
-1 -
couldnt agree more. do survivors care if im a killer not having fun being looped all match? hell no. do survivors care if im killer not having fun being blinded or hit with a pallet? nope. do survivors care if im killer and im not having fun while they all tbag at the gate? it doesnt seem like it.
if a survivor could and some can….loop a killer for 5 gens they dont care if the killer is not having fun, they dont think "ok let them down me because this cant be fun for them". Yet they expect a killer to think "ok the survivor isnt having fun being tunneled all match, so let them go".
-1 -
Good evening.
I had been banned from the forum for some time, and although I have been away from the game for even longer, I have been reading the main thread where “abuse” is being discussed. I wanted to link the discussion from there, but from a different angle, because I believe this term is key to understanding what is happening in Dead by Daylight.
Abuse is often associated with player behavior, and people appeal to ideas such as “don’t do to others what you wouldn’t want done to you.” It is a nice and well-intentioned message, but in a well-designed game system, this kind of moral appeal should not be necessary.
The problem is not that players are abusive, but that the structure of the game itself allows, encourages, and normalizes that abuse. When a system makes it possible for one side to be systematically oppressive to the other, we are not dealing with an individual attitude problem, but with a design problem.
Abuse does not happen because players want to abuse; it happens because the system allows them to.
In DbD, something very specific is happening: structural imbalance, the generalization of perks across killers with radically different mechanics, and the accumulation of randomness make certain abusive situations not only possible, but optimal from the system’s own perspective.
For that reason, the focus should not be on how players behave within a match, but on how we have come to normalize the fact that, in a game where balance is assumed, there exists a tier list with at least five distinct categories.
This is unacceptable for the health of both the game and its players. The game is frustrating due to poor design, not because of player behavior. The solution has been explained many times, and this is not a personal opinion: it is exactly how the vast majority of competitive games have been developed and structured in practice for years.
If the game’s leadership were to reconsider and rethink the base structure, this title could grow from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of players, perhaps more. The idea and the concept are unique; the potential is clearly there.
What is hard to understand is why settle for a design that does not scale when there is a clear opportunity to do things properly. Admitting that the initial approach was not scalable and requires a deep structural rework should not be seen as a failure, but as an opportunity.
The game could be so much more than it currently is, retaining its players while continuously attracting new ones, instead of relying on cycles of churn driven by fatigue and frustration.
Simply by applying design principles that have been proven for decades, abuse would be drastically reduced and would no longer be a structural problem for either side.
Time will tell.
1 -
posting over to encourage burying this until mods wake up. here's a cat
edit: post was in reference to gore that was uploaded to forum. mods can hide this if they wish ty
Post edited by Skittlesthehusky on4
