Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on these and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
We encourage you to be as honest as possible in letting us know how you feel about the game. The information and answers provided are anonymous, not shared with any third-party, and will not be used for purposes other than survey analysis.
Access the survey HERE!
Why future DLC should not have Survivors
Comments
-
New survivors are always fun. The addition of new characters is not an issue, it's the addition of more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more and more perks. There are too many perks, and every chapter brings six more. I wish Behaviour would do some combination of:
- Eliminate multiple perk ranks. This serves no purpose other than to arbitrarily extend the grind.
- Give each character one new teachable perk. Make it unlock at a reasonable level, like 10 or 15, and not 30 or 40.
- Just purge useless perks from the game. Tamp down on the total # available. We have 6 perk pages per role. That's so much analysis paralysis, when you look at the total number of options before you really understand the game a great deal. Do we really need Unrelenting, or Slippery Meat or whatever?
1 -
That’s too much pregame info for the killer though, and helps them too much to adjust their load out.
1 -
I theoretically like the idea of giving each survivor a specific innate perk that only they have. But I think they would need to couple it with not showing the killer any info (i.e. which survivors and items are being picked) before the match. They would also need to be the most benign perks (like Soul Survivor or Left Behind), otherwise no one would play anyone but Bill and Laurie.
0 -
Then they would have to significantly rework items, because one of the few counterplays to keys is being able to make your build counter them.
1 -
Keys should have a not-insignificant progress meter (that uses key charge and resets if you abort) while unlocking the hatch, and it should show the killer your aura while you are doing this, to add an element of risk and careful planning.
1 -
I once proposed something much more risk reward focused, that would still leave the killer in the pregame lobby filled with enough doubt whether the survivors utilise this or not.
My old idea was if a survivor chose to use all 3 of their teachables, leaving them only freedom with their 4th slot, then they’re bestowed a unique character trait bonus of some sort. It would put more consideration into a load out for the survivor. Do they want the unique bonus? Or are they happy to forfeit that for build freedom?
0 -
That sounds like it has potential to be really cool!
0 -
Just for the record, you can open the hatch even if the key is fully depleted.
0 -
Yes, but what I am suggesting here would be more along the lines of a full redesign where key charge would be necessary to fill the meter and open the hatch.
0 -
I'm go to be honest with you I don't think I want new survivor to stop coming. But to your problem wouldn't a better solution be to have the survivor have different states that effect gameplay and contributea to different play styles?
0 -
An example could be say Claudette. It could be that she either Empathy becomes roided up Blood Pact where any injured survivor can see her and know where to get healed. Or it could be that she has even more increased healing speed with both BK and Self Care. Something enticing enough, but not ridiculously strong either. We don’t want bonuses so strong that killers could easily predict what’s likely to be in the lobby, and adjust load out accordingly based on just how far too good the bonuses are that they can’t be passed up
1 -
Fair enough.
1 -
What does global statistics have to do with anything? If you think white people, more specifically, white males are in the minority in video gaming you are highly delusional.
0 -
I said global statistics. As in, number of people around the world.
1 -
Idk man, people were really looking forward to play Felix just for his looks.
As long as the devs see that, more will come.
6 -
And I said it's of no relevance. More so, you are missing the larger points. 1. Don't make an over abundance of survivors for little reason. 2. Keep the grind to a realistic, achievable pace. 3. Social commentary doesn't belong here(in the game).
0 -
- It's not for little reason, it's to justify the pricing of the DLCs. On the other hand, if the DLCs were cheaper, they'd have to fire some people.
- It is achievable. I have all the perks I want on my main survivor. You don't have to go for P3-50 on everyone while also unlocking every single perk. That's your choice.
- There is no social commentary in this game, you must be thinking of something else.
1 -
- BHVR made 100 million dollars last year. I don't think shaving off a few survivors released here and there is going to cost the firing of some people.
- It's only achievable if you don't play killer much and you have a very low limit of what you want.
- All this talk about inclusion, every single type of person needs to be represented otherwise the game isn't progressive enough for some people to feel like 'they finally belong' is within social commentary.
Look, we clearly aren't going to find any common ground, you simply want to argue for arguments sake so best of luck to you.
0 -
- Clearly, I'm not as privy to their internal finances as you seem to be.
- I want perks that actually fit my playstyle. I wouldn't, for example, give a rat's ass if Felix had Babysitter or not because I would never use that perk to begin with.
- I still don't see the social commentary, just people who want the same privilege we as white males already have of seeing people like us represented in basically every medium in existence.
2 -
if survivor had they own stats we be see a lot of the same survivors every time because what they bring..
1 -
Then we would have survivor tier lists
1 -
Or the Devs could build a colourful and diverse cast from across the globe because the department's that handle character design and cosmetics aren't the ones that handle bugs and game design.
3 -
Speak for yourself. Survivor skins are about the only exciting thing I get to look fwd to as a survivor main. Most of the perks that come out are complete garbage. I very much get excited about every girly surv that comes out and so do my friends.
1 -
I feel like survivors should have a very weak passive to them that doesn't really significantly impact the game but adds flavour to their playstyle.
Think Claudette with an innate 5-10% healing speed buff, Dwight having a mini leader, Meg runs a little bit faster at the beginning of her sprint for a second or so (4.0 to 4.1 or something).
It would add so much synergy and "role" to the characters.
1 -
**Teachable perks have joined the game**
1 -
We got that with leatherface and look what happened
1 -
Are Jeff mains really that rare? I myself play Jeff and my friend mains him.
1 -
Lol no.
The new survivors are literally what's keeping me playing this game, I don't care if they're skins or not and I'm always looking forward to what clothes they come out with.
It's not about "How many X mains are out there?" I alternate characters all the time and try to max out the ones I like.
Also:
No more survivors = less options to choose from
less options to choose from = less cosmetic options
less cosmetic options = less money coming in
1 -
Just had to respond to this one cause you make a really good point. But I main Quentin, Yu and Fang, my friend mains Jane, Zarina and Felix so.... that counts for something right lol
1 -
So you're saying killers should get new perks but all survivor would get are some reworks? What about when all perks got a rework, will we just start to rework them again?
And Killer player want new mechanics? weird cause I rarely see the newer killers these days and mostly face spirit/nurse etc on high ranks
1 -
lol I don't think they're gonna be able to sell any more dlc without survivors after the past 4 years, unless they license a ginormously popular or interesting enough killer, maybe A Quiet Place where you don't really see much of the map except for auras tied to sound and 'see' the terrain through echo location or something else interesting enough to be worth trying to play. something that is more gimmicky than voip is annoying. But if it was any other company, I wouldn't doubt so much it's devs could handle something like that and make it fun, playable, and fair to both sides not just the vics (if it was killer favored the nerf would make it a joke we all know).
1 -
Big disagree with OP's point, that would be fun for killers im sure, at the expense that it won't be fun or fair for survivors. Going along those same lines though, it would add another layer of dynamism to the game if the devs reworked the survivors and gave them all (past and future) their own unique built-in abilities.
1 -
I somewhat agree with this statement.
Fixing bugs and then Dropping a sick killer with new mechanics would be more than sufficient. Release the perks to everyone so they don't have to pay for them.
If people who still want a new character to play as want to pay for one then you can add it to the pack or sell it apart from the killer. For the most part people I know who play enough and have perks shared between runners only use them for cosmetic purposes more than their abilities.
2 -
Neutral response to this, killers also have a "skin dispensary" with their outfit sets. Sure each survivor and killer come with new perks, but if people don't want to buy a whole DLC pack or character to an entirety of it's price they should add in a different shrine or anything that gives you the new perks without having to buy a whole DLC. But I can somewhat agree with what you're saying, if you level up your survivors to the highest they can play as almost anyone because they have the perks you've been waiting for them to have. They're all the same perks once you start sharing perks from one survivor to another. The same thing can be applied to killers if you level them up to the highest level, they have perks but yet they still have their unique game changing abilities, I'm thinking what if survivors had their own abilities besides having just perks? If this was the case for survivors as well, it would be something that needs to be looked at for balancing of course.
As for buying each DLC to keep up to date, iridescent shards are one of the virtual currencies that let you buy almost all of the in-game characters, excluding crossover survivors and killers that can be only bought by Auric Cells. The only difference that we have with killers and survivors is that they have their own height, body type, motto and all the other characteristics we can obviously see with our own two eyes. Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but aren't most crossover survivors and killers payable only with Auric Cells?
This wouldn't matter to people who actually spend time with the game on and off frequently, if they're the ones who actually save up their bloodpoints they could might as well level them up to the highest number if they wanted to. Therefore, underrated characters wouldn't be as much underrated because people who are patient with their million of blood points can just spend them on whichever character they please. If we're talking about statistics I'm sure that can be found somewhere here in the forums or a different website for the people who main which character.
Honestly at this point, I'm kinda somewhat bored of the current maps. I wouldn't mind seeing more just to have variety, some small maps need to be reworked in my opinion because they can be just as killer friendly for the next individual. If they're selling map packs at some point I'd gladly pay for them, exploration of maps is something I enjoy but that's what gives us new clues and ideas on what could be our favorite maps to play on, where to avoid dead zones of sorts.
0
