If the devs listened to the community what do you think would be the result?
Really simple, pretty much what the title is.
I am of course assuming we only take account of the majority of the player base and not single players claiming whatever thing to be listened too.
What do you think would be the result of the game in todays terms?
Comments
-
I know there would be a shirtless Meyers....🌈👻
43 -
That the game would be in a better state now than it currently is? People are always going to complain, there's no doubt about that. But there is a lot of justified anger at the developers for the current state of the game.
41 -
The majority of the forums or the majority of the playerbase?
7 -
Player base, combining all platforms including the forums.
3 -
I'm pretty sure it would lead to a dead game.
If there is one thing i learned it's that gamers make for terrible designers.
42 -
The nurse would be playable.
18 -
Considering what this dev team is I would have to disagree with the changes they have made as of recent.
8 -
I've seen someone say that all survivors should start the trial downed, with a one time use, built in unbreakable to solve gen speeds.
I agree that they should listen to the community, but not all of it.
8 -
True well im sure that was a troll comment.
Yhea tho not all of it.
Although thats why I stated specifically what the majority wants rather then just one person.
5 -
More killers will get nerfed to oblivion before release (Freddy 2.0 anybody?).
While they SHOULD listen to their playerbase, and clearly arent anymore, they should not listen to the vocal playerbase regarding balancing matters.
5 -
But all designers are gamers so....?
2 -
Hahahah! Yeah.
0 -
A free killer would be released, and it would be Cote. Average speed killer but the store would be full of dev skins.
Mori would be Cote saying "You've done a pretty good...job so far." and snapping the survivors neck.
10 -
What i meant was gamers that didn't recieve studies for designing.
The experience of gaming alone makes for terrible designers.
There is a lot more thought process then most realise
3 -
I think there would be tons of shirtless survivors and killers...
3 -
The game would become pretty boring imo.
Rebalancing the game to make it so it's absolutely not possible for killers to tunnel or camp at all will just lead the game into a safe m1 simulator for anyone who gets caught early as they wait their turn to be chased again. But hey DS + unbreakable will be deleted from the game.
Voice comms... That's uh. Well if you think the community is up for it.
Loads of killer buffs. Some kinda crazy some kinda meh. All chases end in 20 seconds or less and survivors manage a max of running through 2 tiles.
Hooks are removed and spaces out. Body blocking and sabo will work now so time to mess with the killer. Hook dead zones on the edges of the map will be fixed.
Schrodinger's pallets will be everywhere. Do they exist or do they not exist? If the killer checks then it doesn't exist. If the survivor checks then it exists. If nobody's there, who knows?
Pretty much every killer is deleted and nea will be the only killer.
1 -
pretty sure the result would be a forest full of devs that committed suicide after all of the negative bullshift they just got done listening to
7 -
if they did it appropriately and actually took our advice/ideas more the game would be better.
i have seen and made many reworks or buffs for various topics and a lot of them are actually good but get ignored by the devs and community unless it concerns meta perks or something highly debatable like death slingers ADS. try making a buff suggestion about Hex: the third seal or unnerving presence barely anyone pays attention to them.
of course seeing something controversial like a noed/ds/bbq/insert "OP" perk should not be taken at face value right away and its important to see how the community as a whole reacts to the idea. One of the biggest things i would like is some way to actually decide what perks or killers get reworked/buffed/nerfed next and for the devs to take our ideas for those things. look at the hillbilly addons, quite a few of the addons are trash how many better ideas for an addon do you think this community could come up with?
I get they can't just tell us everything they will do but taking more of our advice and allowing us to have some impute in reworks and balance in this game would make it a lot better.
edit: an amazing example of something we know better than them is how broken OoO is despite its low survival rate, if we were asked to provide some ideas and a promise that this perk would be reworked they would get a ton of support and ideas for it.
6 -
OoO won't last even for 1week
8 -
I value your thinking.
0 -
XD
0 -
The majority of the player base is not present on the forums. Therefore nothing will happen since every single topic will have to be disregarded as per your rules.
But if we ignore that, the game will be dead 100%.
0 -
Regardless if the forums doesn't have or does have the majority of the playerbase, I say only the majority in general as in everything combined.
0 -
If they took the feedback, gathered trusted sources to fact check information and see how changes could effect the game. Did careful testing of risky changes so the game could develop and evolve over time.
Yeah I think if they listened to us the game would be better.
5 -
(In)Famously the creator of Shenmue DOESN'T play games!
2 -
Probably a broken mess due to all the absurdly biased suggestions that don’t consider the opposing side.
Oh and way way too many shirtless characters.
6 -
A terrible game if they listened to every players complaint. Balance ever shifting as new complaints appear.
3 -
Killer mains: omg nerf survs so op.
Devs: okay, we nerfed survivors
Survivor mains: omg nerf killers so op
Devs: okay, we nerfed killers
Repeat.
We would not get anywhere. Poeple saying it will actually improve the game assume it means devs would only listen to their side and nerf the other into the ground.
3 -
Regarding balance, they should totally not listen to the player base. I hear enough stupid requests that are totally subjective and don't consider more than the own personal experience.
Also people complain too much about small things just for comfy reasons.
3 -
If they listened to all the players? Well, I think Sir Humphrey provides the right analogy for why that's a bad idea...
6 -
If they listened to the community and acted on their wishes? Survivor would be unplayable, killer would be boring and the game would be dead.
3 -
I think the game would be dead soom. By design, the survivor side is the majority, which basicly could then force any change they want.
And even if not, people who play games have no idea about game design or game balance, making them not a good advisor.
1 -
7 -
they dont
DBD has their own product owners that make the decisions about the game even when they surely do not even have 1k hours
DBD is a zero-risk game, not innovating with new game modes since was born, so repetitive and dont expect devs will listen to us
1 -
The nurse is playable wdym? Maybe she’s not the right killer for you then?
0 -
More horny skins.
More balance patches.
More unlockables through gameplay.
Probably more dumb stuff too. But it would be fun to see.
0 -
If your talking about balance! The game would probably die for the newer players!
Blizzard decided to listen to their Overwatch League player's to bring balance to the game! While at the top ranks the game was balanced, it was way unbalanced for the casual player's!
While somethings need to be addressed about the balance of the game, for example DS and NOED
2 -
You clearly haven't played nurse any time recently. She is so glitchy and broken that shes nearly impossible to play.
1 -
I disagree with all the people saying the game will die. That's what ptb's are for. They could go down the list with suggested changes, do a ptb for say, no more than 10 of those changes, and see what the players think. If they just did ptb's with minimal changes and not super big mechaninc overhauls, on a regular basis, the community would actually be listened to and actually learn why some changes wouldn't work, or be glad that other changes are good for the game. The community would become more active and happy, bringing more players into the game.
0 -
I like how you actually gave a reason why you think that and didn't just make an assertion. I see the logic in your thinking.
1 -
Couldn't happen. Too many different opinions to actually predict what would happen.
1 -
Shirtless felix and blight
1 -
i feel it would lead to an increase in gen times, instead of focusing on map design and other balance issues, and the game becoming so unbelievably boring for survivors that the game would just die
0 -
Chaos. And the Devs would overworked trying to keep up with the demands and ever changing focus of what players are whining about.
1 -
No offense but I hate to think of that, I don't want this to happen, I wnat DBD to contiue for a long time, I don't want to actually see that message every becoming true
0 -
This. Realistically speaking, this.
Should there be more communication from the devs and less secrecy? sure. but that can only work when people also manage to not go for their necks if some hype doesn't live up to unrealistic expectations.
0 -
The community is constantly fighting over solutions for the game and their side of it. Why would they listen to us if we cant even agree on anything? The only thing we can agree on is more bug fixes and better optimization and less content.
2 -
But take Minecraft for example. The community wanted lava boats for the Nether Update. Mojang took the general concept of "crossing lava" and introduced the Strider, something better for the game than "lava boats".
I'm pretty sure if the devs took more feedback from the forums and acted upon it with more vigor, it would lead to a flourishing game. The only way that games die from player feedback is if the developers aren't fulfilling their roles as the conduits.
When developers really listen to the community's needs and don't just rely on their own "gut feeling[s]" to make (imo faulty) design decisions, and when developers then take the time to really think about how they can use their knowledge as developers to fulfill those needs in ways the community hadn't considered before, then a game prospers. Gamers are often not too great at articulating what it is that drives them to want the change, but that's the developers' job, and ignoring those drives and factors leads to a lot of frustration from everyone in a playerbase.
0 -
I'm going to reply the same thing to you that I did Sonzaishinai:
"But take Minecraft for example. The community wanted lava boats for the Nether Update. Mojang took the general concept of "crossing lava" and introduced the Strider, something better for the game than "lava boats".
I'm pretty sure if the devs took more feedback from the forums and acted upon it with more vigor, it would lead to a flourishing game. The only way that games die from player feedback is if the developers aren't fulfilling their roles as the conduits.
When developers really listen to the community's needs and don't just rely on their own "gut feeling[s]" to make (imo faulty) design decisions, and when developers then take the time to really think about how they can use their knowledge as developers to fulfill those needs in ways the community hadn't considered before, then a game prospers. Gamers are often not too great at articulating what it is that drives them to want the change, but that's the developers' job, and ignoring those drives and factors leads to a lot of frustration from everyone in a playerbase."
and I'll add something else. Taking feedback to just add more and more ores into vanilla Minecraft would be a bad idea even though that's what many players desired. Adding more and more ways to go about getting ore and using it or more things to do in the underground while getting ore is what Mojang did (save a few occasions where another ore was justified), and this solution appeased the players asking for more ores who continued enjoying the game for what it was. The devs' job is to take criticism and feedback and interpret it into a better solution for all, something the DbD devs are mediocre at (at best). If the devs actually listened to all the feedback being given, they would be able to come up with a better game. Just removing NOED or removing DS is a stupid thing to do, and even if some of the community is begging for it, actually doing so would mean the DbD devs are not listening to the community--not understanding, something very lacking rn in light of the Clown comments and the comment on the health patch among other comments.
2 -
eigther all survivors spawn on a hook or the killer does.
i dont think there would be anything inbetween...
0
