http://dbd.game/killswitch
Why are perks so game-changing in DBD?
Genuine question, I don't know if they're very different in other games, but from what I saw in Deathgarden, perks seem to normally (?) be slight adjustments to a player's ability in terms of efficiency and speed. But in DBD, so many perks have game-changing mechanics and it seems a little absurd to me how they can be so radically game-changing for being just a perk?
Does anybody else wonder this too or is this a normal game thing? I usually only play horror games so I don't know.
Comments
-
I don't remember much about Deathgarden except that two healers together is the most busted thing in existence, at least against the Poacher. I thought there were perks that allowed them to heal each other faster than I could shoot them, but I don't actually remember.
1 -
In my experience games where you're on a team are supposed to make you weak in one area so you rely on a teammate to fill in that weakness with their strength. This game it's random teammates though and you can't swap perks during a match so I kinda get why survivors can be so tanky but it's still eh.
A lot of games go for rock paper scissors balance. Like if you specialize in one build, your opponent build can completely nullify you. Does that work in Dead by Daylight? Not really. The thing about games like this is that there aren't a lot of them in the genre that are actually good so this game is treading new ground. We really don't know what the magic solution is so it's hard for me to yell at the Devs and be like 'Hey. Do this or you'll regret it.' because I don't know the answer either. Simple as.
1 -
Because it makes them interesting and worth getting? If perks only offered slight changes to how you play they'd be boring. The fact that they can significantly change how you play the game allows for variety which keeps the game feeling fresh. I mean, consider this; Let's say there were 2 versions of DBD. In one rancor exists as it does now. In the other, rancor lets you move 2% faster if you're chasing your obsession. It's just a slight change that'll give you a bit of an advantage but doesn't fundamentally change how you play the game. Which one would you want to invest time into? The one that rewards your time with a new playstyle or the one that rewards your time with a minute, damn near negligible change?
I didn't play deathgarden so I can't comment there but I think that in most games in general, how drastic a change something gets you should be proportional to how much effort is involved in getting the thing. Perks in DBD are part of the reward system of the game. You have to invest a considerable amount of time to get one so the reward should be worth that investment. Games in which perks offer slight very slight buffs tend to hand those perks out like candy. Take ARPGS like diablo for example.
Going from a sword with 15 attack to a sword with 15 attack + 5% exp on kill isn't something that's going to take you a very long time. You'll find that second sword about 5 minutes after starting the game. On the other hand, legendary weapons, which can drastically change the way your character and their abilities function take a lot more time to find since more often than not they only drop at max level and they tend to have low drop rates. You have to invest more time to get them, so they have to be worth the reward. Its the same principle applied to DBD's perks.
2 -
Perks + Add ons should be only mild effects, honestly. Something as powerful as being invincible for 60 seconds, getting up on your own, getting free downs because someone did or didn't do a totem, and things like that are WAY too impactful.
2 -
I disagree. The current perk system has its problems but it makes the game much more interesting. Build diversity is a good thing. When all bonuses are just slight stat buffs then build diversity doesn't exist in any meaningful way and that makes the metagame boring. That said, if perks and addons did only have mild effects, the game's entire economy would have to be reworked. Perks are only worth the time investment right now because they can meaningfully change your game. If they were reduced to "This one gives you +1% move speed" and "this reduces your missed swing animation by 3%" then you'd have to be able to get all of the perks off a killer or survivor in like, an hour or two at most, otherwise they wouldn't be worth the effort.
1 -
(I accidentally double posted here)
0 -
if perks weren't game changing, they'd be boring. There were very good perks in Deathgarden that did change the game, it just usually was few and far between.
1 -
It's because the Devs have been using bandaid perks to fix broken parts of the game. They essentially add a small mechanic that potentially changes how an entire scenario plays out if someone happened to have it equipped. Mostly it's survivor perks that have the most jarring shifts, but killers literally win or lose based on perks alone thanks to gen-control and tracking perks. Essentially, there are parts of the basekit that are missing and you can choose what perk you want to fill it in.
0
