We have temporarily disabled The Houndmaster (Bone Chill Event queue) and Baermar Uraz's Ugly Sweater Cosmetic (all queues) due to issues affecting gameplay.

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
The Dead by Daylight team would like your feedback in a Player Satisfaction survey.

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 do you risk our safety and not have dedicated servers?

AppyB
AppyB Member Posts: 10
in General Discussions
By not having dedicated servers you comprimise the safety of your player base. Anyone can look up the ip addresses of the other players they're connected to in a game with relative ease and then launch a DDoS attack. I have stopped playing dead by daylight after someone in my friend circle who I've had fallouts with in the past has started ddosing me and I suspect he will also ddos others I play with and try to blame me. I ofcourse can't prove it was him but this must also be an issue many others are facing. By not having dedicated servers you put us all at risk by playing your game
«1

Answers

  • azazer
    azazer Member Posts: 446
    The above.

    You gotta think this a game that's been out 2 years. It's core player base is already established and they aren't selling at a high price when new players enter the fog. They aren't raking in money, they are maintaining. They even started micro transactions, which I don't think was from greed but necessity. 
  • Countfunkular
    Countfunkular Member Posts: 405
    I don't know why we don't have dedicated servers. Given how much the game has become monetize they should have a good amount of money by now
  • Jed
    Jed Member Posts: 254

    @Fibijean said:
    F13 had dedicated servers when it came out, and I'm guessing a larger budget since it was a licenced game. Now that DbD has been out for 2+ years, it's going to be more difficult and resource-consuming to switch to dedicated servers than it would have been to start out with them. Also ddosing isn't that huge a problem - the evidence for that being the very fact that they're not making dedicated servers a higher priority. It sucks that it happens at all, but the truth is it's not a common enough occurence for it to actually affect the reputation of the game and the company.

    Wasnt Friday the 13th a kickstarter game backed by fans? If so then i would be surprised if they had a bigger budget. The console version of F13 just got dedicated servers a few months ago or so and I highly doubt that game has money pouring in to support it now. I got it a little over q year ago on steam and the daily numbers now are lucky to hit around 500 players. If a dead or dying game can afford it (without having any microtransactions) then I dont see why DBD cant have dedicated servers.

  • Kilmeran
    Kilmeran Member Posts: 3,142
    edited October 2018

    @Fibijean said:
    F13 had dedicated servers when it came out, and I'm guessing a larger budget since it was a licenced game.

    Not really sure about that. It was also partially Kickstarter funded. And their little KS story also tells how they got the license, and how Sean Cunningham came to them based on the "serial numbers filed off" game they were originally making called Summer Camp.

    https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/613356213/friday-the-13th-the-game

    @Jed said:
    Wasnt Friday the 13th a kickstarter game backed by fans? If so then i would be surprised if they had a bigger budget. The console version of F13 just got dedicated servers a few months ago or so and I highly doubt that game has money pouring in to support it now. I got it a little over q year ago on steam and the daily numbers now are lucky to hit around 500 players. If a dead or dying game can afford it (without having any microtransactions) then I dont see why DBD cant have dedicated servers.

    Precisely, there is no reason not to have dedicated servers. The only thing I can surmise is either greed or laziness on the part of BHVR, or the possibility that they took a massive financial bath on Deathgarden and might be in a questionable financial position now, and don't want to let on about it.

  • Kilmeran
    Kilmeran Member Posts: 3,142

    And to be honest, one could use a VPN to protect against it, but I have zero use for a VPN outside of this game, and absolutely refuse to pay extra (even a measly $4 a month) for a VPN because they refuse to put in dedicated servers. Instead, they put dedicated servers in Deathgarden, which is completely dead.

    I'm new, and this game is becoming less and less worth playing the more I learn about it.

  • Master
    Master Member Posts: 10,200

    @AppyB said:
    By not having dedicated servers you comprimise the safety of your player base. Anyone can look up the ip addresses of the other players they're connected to in a game with relative ease and then launch a DDoS attack. I have stopped playing dead by daylight after someone in my friend circle who I've had fallouts with in the past has started ddosing me and I suspect he will also ddos others I play with and try to blame me. I ofcourse can't prove it was him but this must also be an issue many others are facing. By not having dedicated servers you put us all at risk by playing your game

    Ehm just that you know.
    DDOS is actually even above "bannable" since it is actually illegal.

    Maybe you wanna tell your friend....^^

  • Master
    Master Member Posts: 10,200

    @AppyB said:
    It doesn't cost that much in relation to what they make to have dedicated servers. Even Friday the 13th has them and that game is dying. It's more than just an ethical responsibility to have them. Otherwise you just end up with a toxic community that goes around ddosing each other. That's not good for the game or the reputation of the company. It's pretty bad that I can no longer play this game with my friends because someone in our group is ddosing me who I have no way of proving and he claims he's being ddosd by me and I highly suspect he will do it to some of my other friends. It's not only fair that they protect the player base, it's a necessity 

    Not the actual servers are expensive.
    The expensive and time consuming part is adapting the gamecode to enable dedicated servers

  • Kilmeran
    Kilmeran Member Posts: 3,142
    edited October 2018

    @Master said: Ehm just that you know.
    DDOS is actually even above "bannable" since it is actually illegal.

    Maybe you wanna tell your friend....^^

    While true, it also depends on the country of origin as to what can, or will, be done. If the player is U.S. and the attacker in the U.S., it's a simple matter of refer it to the FBI. If the attacker is in Canada, there are law enforcement relations between us and them, but it still gets a little complicated.

    If they're Russian, like the posts he mentioned that flooded his Steam profile, forget about it. We're too busy playing a bigger cyber cat-and-mouse game with the Russians, and a DDos attack in a video game isn't even going to blip their radar.

    That's the core issue: If the individuals are in separate countries, lots of luck.

    I'd also be more concerned about any potential swatting.

  • TheBean
    TheBean Member Posts: 2,320

    @AppyB said:
    By not having dedicated servers you comprimise the safety of your player base. Anyone can look up the ip addresses of the other players they're connected to in a game with relative ease and then launch a DDoS attack. I have stopped playing dead by daylight after someone in my friend circle who I've had fallouts with in the past has started ddosing me and I suspect he will also ddos others I play with and try to blame me. I ofcourse can't prove it was him but this must also be an issue many others are facing. By not having dedicated servers you put us all at risk by playing your game

    What a weird ass post....

    Get a VPN if that is a major concern.

    Change your IP address. How would your friend keep getting your IP address if you changed it?

    How the ######### would they ever be able to blame you? Other then just verbal BS.

    Stop trying to fear monger. If you are that concerned about exposing your IP address, then get a VPN.

  • Kilmeran
    Kilmeran Member Posts: 3,142

    @altruistic said:
    Don't worry, Death Garden has dedicated servers :)

    Yeah, I'm going to say the same thing about Matt Cote that I've said about Jeff Kaplan in Overwatch: After 2+ years, it's time for a new Game Lead.

  • Fibijean
    Fibijean Member Posts: 8,342

    @Kilmeran @Jed I'm going to be totally honest - everything I said about F13 was unresearched, and I haven't actually played the game. I assumed if it was licenced, it would have had financial backing from the licence owners. And it's a fairly new game, so I also made an assumption that if it had dedicated servers they would have been there from the beginning. I stand corrected :) So ignore everything I said about F13.

    My points about money and resources in terms of dedicated servers for DbD still stand though.

  • AppyB
    AppyB Member Posts: 10
    I do use a vpn but it's in no way protection you get ddosd still and you have to then change the vpn server to get a new ip which is then revealed again. The game is still disrupted by an attack even if you are able to change server quickly and I am more concerned for friends I play with than myself. The person I suspect that is behind it doesn't like me and would want to pin the blame on me. For this reason I refuse to play anymore dbd with my friends 
  • Nightmare247
    Nightmare247 Member Posts: 187

    You take some responsibility of risk playing this game. That could be showing your IP, it could be permitting yourself to be abused, to language in post-game chat. The only true way to protect yourself is not to play.

    However, just because games like F13 have dedicated servers does not mean that it is a simple cost-effective solution. F13 has roughly 1000 or so players on the game so dedicated servers are a drop in the hat for a game that retails at $40 usd. Dead by Daylight is 1/2 to 1/4 (on sale) that cost. They have to pay a portion of that to Steam, Humble, etc. Not to mention that until June/July 2018 this company was under management by another company. Most likely a venture capitalist group who they owed money too. Then add in licensing rights they paid for quite a few characters. None of these even cover the overhead cost of salaries, equipment, and keeping the lights on.

    Removing financials the game was also built on a P2P code. So rebuilding the code from the ground up (I assume, not a programmer) could take months to years in order to get it to a dedicated server. That takes someone who is trained in networking and programming not to mention adding staff to run the servers and maintain them etc.

    With all that said and done, while we as a player group would love dedicated servers it will take more than 2 years because the foundation/groundwork is not there.

  • Jed
    Jed Member Posts: 254

    @Peanits said:
    Dedicated servers are not such a clear cut best option. Just a couple, for example:

    1: More lag for killers. Right now, everything is handled on your end. When you should get a hit, you get a hit. With a dedicated server, there's going to be a delay on everything you do. If someone vaults a window and you hit them them, you might not get a hit because by the time that command gets to the server, they're out of range and safe. It's important that the killer is able to consistently get hits, and missing a single one due to lag can buy the survivor a significant amount of time.

    2: Depending on where you live, more lag in general. Dedicated servers are not everywhere, they're a physical thing. If you like in a far off corner of the world with only a few hundred other players, there's probably not going to be a server there. You'd have a significantly higher ping because of it.

    3: DDOS attacks in general. They don't go away, the difference is now when people do it, it knocks the game offline for everyone.

    4: It's not as simple as just changing some variables, you'd need to rewrite loads of code to add dedicated servers. That means less content for a while, and probably a huge amount of issues with lag that weren't there before.

    That's not to say that they're all bad, but is it worth all the problems that come with it? Probably not. About DDOS attacks though: If someone threatens you with one, please report them in-game. We take stuff like that very seriously, and they will likely receive a permanent ban for doing so. It's a game, there's no reason to threaten people like that. Same goes for any other real life/DOX threats. Just make absolutely sure that you report them in-game, as this will save the chat log for us to review.

    Hmm...why then do so many competitive online games have dedicated servers? I know most console games dont but PC players always seem to want it. The game Warframe doesn't have dedicated servers and gets DDOS attacks on a regular basis it seems...which makes the game unplayable.

  • ShowMeUrBirb
    ShowMeUrBirb Member Posts: 63
    edited October 2018

    @Jed said:

    @Peanits said:
    Dedicated servers are not such a clear cut best option. Just a couple, for example:

    1: More lag for killers. Right now, everything is handled on your end. When you should get a hit, you get a hit. With a dedicated server, there's going to be a delay on everything you do. If someone vaults a window and you hit them them, you might not get a hit because by the time that command gets to the server, they're out of range and safe. It's important that the killer is able to consistently get hits, and missing a single one due to lag can buy the survivor a significant amount of time.

    2: Depending on where you live, more lag in general. Dedicated servers are not everywhere, they're a physical thing. If you like in a far off corner of the world with only a few hundred other players, there's probably not going to be a server there. You'd have a significantly higher ping because of it.

    3: DDOS attacks in general. They don't go away, the difference is now when people do it, it knocks the game offline for everyone.

    4: It's not as simple as just changing some variables, you'd need to rewrite loads of code to add dedicated servers. That means less content for a while, and probably a huge amount of issues with lag that weren't there before.

    That's not to say that they're all bad, but is it worth all the problems that come with it? Probably not. About DDOS attacks though: If someone threatens you with one, please report them in-game. We take stuff like that very seriously, and they will likely receive a permanent ban for doing so. It's a game, there's no reason to threaten people like that. Same goes for any other real life/DOX threats. Just make absolutely sure that you report them in-game, as this will save the chat log for us to review.

    Hmm...why then do so many competitive online games have dedicated servers? I know most console games dont but PC players always seem to want it. The game Warframe doesn't have dedicated servers and gets DDOS attacks on a regular basis it seems...which makes the game unplayable.

    A ) Because those games' code was written with the intention of having dediacted servers.
    B ) Because they at the very beginning adjusted their business model to cover cost of servers
    C ) Because they had enough staff to host those servers. (AFAIK BHVR had less than 100 people when the game launched)
    D ) DDOS is not as common as it may look like. After all you must have an army of infected computers to DDOS someone.
    E ) Have you seen problems with logging-in when the event started? If we would have dedicated servers we would have this for not only logging-in but also games. (and for much longer)

  • Incarnate
    Incarnate Member Posts: 677

    Despite the reaspons for and against dedicated servers, it is for the better of the game overall, and they should be working on bringing it over to dedicated servers, even if that part would be a work in progress for a good while, it's definitely something they should be working towards. It may be that they didn't have that much funds to begin with, but they've had tremendous amounts of growth, both in terms of infrastructure, technologies, more staff members, more funds to work with, etc. I'm not saying they shouldn't be making new content, but they should also be working on bringing it over to dedicated servers.

    I think it's also important enough to mention that, having it P2P isn't just putting everyone's safety who's connected in jeopardy,, but it also imposes a lot of performance issues unto the host, which will affect everyone if the hosts computer isn't capable enough to act as a server while also playing the game, then that will severely affect the systems performance, which certainly also will translate into bad network performance. So yes, dedicated servers most certainly is a must, and it's not because they cannot afford it or that it will take too much time, its that if they do, they will profit less.

  • Jed
    Jed Member Posts: 254

    @ShowMeUrBirb said:

    @Jed said:

    @Peanits said:
    Dedicated servers are not such a clear cut best option. Just a couple, for example:

    1: More lag for killers. Right now, everything is handled on your end. When you should get a hit, you get a hit. With a dedicated server, there's going to be a delay on everything you do. If someone vaults a window and you hit them them, you might not get a hit because by the time that command gets to the server, they're out of range and safe. It's important that the killer is able to consistently get hits, and missing a single one due to lag can buy the survivor a significant amount of time.

    2: Depending on where you live, more lag in general. Dedicated servers are not everywhere, they're a physical thing. If you like in a far off corner of the world with only a few hundred other players, there's probably not going to be a server there. You'd have a significantly higher ping because of it.

    3: DDOS attacks in general. They don't go away, the difference is now when people do it, it knocks the game offline for everyone.

    4: It's not as simple as just changing some variables, you'd need to rewrite loads of code to add dedicated servers. That means less content for a while, and probably a huge amount of issues with lag that weren't there before.

    That's not to say that they're all bad, but is it worth all the problems that come with it? Probably not. About DDOS attacks though: If someone threatens you with one, please report them in-game. We take stuff like that very seriously, and they will likely receive a permanent ban for doing so. It's a game, there's no reason to threaten people like that. Same goes for any other real life/DOX threats. Just make absolutely sure that you report them in-game, as this will save the chat log for us to review.

    Hmm...why then do so many competitive online games have dedicated servers? I know most console games dont but PC players always seem to want it. The game Warframe doesn't have dedicated servers and gets DDOS attacks on a regular basis it seems...which makes the game unplayable.

    A ) Because those games' code was written with the intention of having dediacted servers.
    B ) Because they at the very beginning adjusted their business model to cover cost of servers
    C ) Because they had enough staff to host those servers. (AFAIK BHVR had less than 100 people when the game launched)
    D ) DDOS is not as common as it may look like. After all you must have an army of infected computers to DDOS someone.
    E ) Have you seen problems with logging-in when the event started? If we would have dedicated servers we would have this for not only logging-in but also games. (and for much longer)

    Ok...so it comes down to money hehe...gotcha.

  • Khalednazari
    Khalednazari Member Posts: 1,433
    I completely agree with @Peanits. 
  • ShowMeUrBirb
    ShowMeUrBirb Member Posts: 63
    edited October 2018

    @Jed said:

    @ShowMeUrBirb said:

    @Jed said:

    @Peanits said:
    Dedicated servers are not such a clear cut best option. Just a couple, for example:

    1: More lag for killers. Right now, everything is handled on your end. When you should get a hit, you get a hit. With a dedicated server, there's going to be a delay on everything you do. If someone vaults a window and you hit them them, you might not get a hit because by the time that command gets to the server, they're out of range and safe. It's important that the killer is able to consistently get hits, and missing a single one due to lag can buy the survivor a significant amount of time.

    2: Depending on where you live, more lag in general. Dedicated servers are not everywhere, they're a physical thing. If you like in a far off corner of the world with only a few hundred other players, there's probably not going to be a server there. You'd have a significantly higher ping because of it.

    3: DDOS attacks in general. They don't go away, the difference is now when people do it, it knocks the game offline for everyone.

    4: It's not as simple as just changing some variables, you'd need to rewrite loads of code to add dedicated servers. That means less content for a while, and probably a huge amount of issues with lag that weren't there before.

    That's not to say that they're all bad, but is it worth all the problems that come with it? Probably not. About DDOS attacks though: If someone threatens you with one, please report them in-game. We take stuff like that very seriously, and they will likely receive a permanent ban for doing so. It's a game, there's no reason to threaten people like that. Same goes for any other real life/DOX threats. Just make absolutely sure that you report them in-game, as this will save the chat log for us to review.

    Hmm...why then do so many competitive online games have dedicated servers? I know most console games dont but PC players always seem to want it. The game Warframe doesn't have dedicated servers and gets DDOS attacks on a regular basis it seems...which makes the game unplayable.

    A ) Because those games' code was written with the intention of having dediacted servers.
    B ) Because they at the very beginning adjusted their business model to cover cost of servers
    C ) Because they had enough staff to host those servers. (AFAIK BHVR had less than 100 people when the game launched)
    D ) DDOS is not as common as it may look like. After all you must have an army of infected computers to DDOS someone.
    E ) Have you seen problems with logging-in when the event started? If we would have dedicated servers we would have this for not only logging-in but also games. (and for much longer)

    Ok...so it comes down to money hehe...gotcha.

    Money, time and people... as with everything.

  • Kilmeran
    Kilmeran Member Posts: 3,142
    edited October 2018

    @Peanits said:
    Dedicated servers are not such a clear cut best option. Just a couple, for example:

    1: More lag for killers. Right now, everything is handled on your end. When you should get a hit, you get a hit. With a dedicated server, there's going to be a delay on everything you do. If someone vaults a window and you hit them them, you might not get a hit because by the time that command gets to the server, they're out of range and safe. It's important that the killer is able to consistently get hits, and missing a single one due to lag can buy the survivor a significant amount of time.

    I'm sorry . . . but what? If you're going to run 30-tick servers, then maybe. This is why you run 60-tick servers, which is why they are run in FPS games. It's to take that lag on hits to an absolute minimum.

    It's also why you run region based servers, otherwise, you run into the other issue you mentioned, which is exactly why Paladins is such a trash game if you're not U.S. based.

    I've looked at BHVR as a company at their website. They certainly don't seem to be a small company. It just seems like they'd prefer not to make the necessary investment for servers in DBD.

    Deathgarden has dedicated servers. I would assume they're at least 60-tick given that it's a shooter game. So, tell us again how dedicated servers would not solve problems in a game that is primarily melee based, when they were obviously good enough for BHVR's little fast-paced shooter? Because it makes no sense that they were good enough for such a fast paced game, but would suddenly cause so many lag issues in a much slower paced game.

  • ShowMeUrBirb
    ShowMeUrBirb Member Posts: 63

    @Kilmeran said:

    @Peanits said:
    Dedicated servers are not such a clear cut best option. Just a couple, for example:

    1: More lag for killers. Right now, everything is handled on your end. When you should get a hit, you get a hit. With a dedicated server, there's going to be a delay on everything you do. If someone vaults a window and you hit them them, you might not get a hit because by the time that command gets to the server, they're out of range and safe. It's important that the killer is able to consistently get hits, and missing a single one due to lag can buy the survivor a significant amount of time.

    I will call this one out. If you're going to run 30-tick servers, then yes. This is why you run 60-tick servers, which is why they are run in FPS games. It's to take that lag to an absolute minimum.

    It's also why you run region based servers, otherwise, you run into the other issue you mentioned, which is exactly why Paladins is such a trash game if you're not U.S. based.

    I've looked at BHVR as a company at their website. They certainly don't seem to be a small company. It just seems like they'd prefer not to make the necessary investment for servers in DBD.

    Ticks work only on server-side. If you're having 200 ping, tick-rate doesn't matter. We already have players with 200-ish ping on P2P connection. Servers would crank this up for them by next 20-50ms.

    I'm not an IT tho, I might be wrong.

  • Kilmeran
    Kilmeran Member Posts: 3,142
    edited October 2018

    @ShowMeUrBirb said: Ticks work only on server-side. If you're having 200 ping, tick-rate doesn't matter. We already have players with 200-ish ping on P2P connection. Servers would crank this up for them by next 20-50ms.

    I'm not an IT tho, I might be wrong.

    Usually if you're running that kind of ping you have one of two issues, or a combination of them. You are either on subpar internet to begin with, or you are outside the region (such as in Korea linking to U.S. servers). Which is why I said they'd also have to set-up region-based servers. Overwatch does, Paladins doesn't, for example, and Paladins is crap to play outside the U.S.

    But anyway, it's all a moot point. BHVR obviously doesn't want the dedicated server investment in regards to DBD. And I'm not really interested in playing a PvP game via P2P hosting, so it's probably time I move on. Peer-to-peer hosting should be left to co-op games, for obvious reasons.

  • ShowMeUrBirb
    ShowMeUrBirb Member Posts: 63

    @Kilmeran said:

    @ShowMeUrBirb said: Ticks work only on server-side. If you're having 200 ping, tick-rate doesn't matter. We already have players with 200-ish ping on P2P connection. Servers would crank this up for them by next 20-50ms.

    I'm not an IT tho, I might be wrong.

    Usually if you're running that kind of ping you have one of two issues, or a combination of them. You are either on subpar internet to begin with, or you are outside the region (such as in Korea linking to U.S. servers). Which is why I said they'd also have to set-up region-based servers. Overwatch does, Paladins doesn't, for example, and Paladins is crap to play outside the U.S.

    You're right. Some people will benefit form servers, some won't. It all depends on where you live in relation to servers and other players.

    To my mind servers wouldn't change game too much:
    If survivor and killer (host) have good internet, it doesn't matter.
    If killer has good internet and survivor has wooden net, the outcome is the same.
    If killer has ######### net, you can check ping and dodge.

    I still don't get why people want dedicated servers so bad.

    Remember that it costs them money, time and human resources, it's not worth for BHVR if community breaks even on it.

  • Jed
    Jed Member Posts: 254

    Ok I have a question for the people here acting like dedicated servers are worse. Why does the newest call of duty game have dedicated servers. Why would a big very popular and competitive online game like that have dedicated servers if they are worse?

  • megdonalds
    megdonalds Member Posts: 742
    edited October 2018

    @ShowMeUrBirb said:

    D ) DDOS is not as common as it may look like. After all you must have an army of infected computers to DDOS someone.

    This. Most people don't even know how (D)DoS really works and how it makes an impact at all.

  • Chrona
    Chrona Member Posts: 245
    AppyB said:
    It doesn't cost that much in relation to what they make to have demdicated servers. Even Friday the 13th has them and that game is dying. It's more than just an ethical responsibility to have them. Otherwise you just end up with a toxic community that goes around ddosing each other. That's not good for the game or the reputation of the company. It's pretty bad that I can no longer play this game with my friends because someone in our group is ddosing me who I have no way of proving and he claims he's being ddosd by me and I highly suspect he will do it to some of my other friends. It's not only fair that they protect the player base, it's a necessity 
    You do realize that EVERY first party game for every console, as an example, has been peer to peer?  Most games are p2p.  End of story, really.  Only major games made by giant developers have dedicated servers really: unless, for example, its friday the 13th who are lefally prevented from creating ANYTHING else for the game.  I mean, if you have literally nothing else you're legally allowed to do...

    Also, run a VPN. 
    Jed said:

    Ok I have a question for the people here acting like dedicated servers are worse. Why does the newest call of duty game have dedicated servers. Why would a big very popular and competitive online game like that have dedicated servers if they are worse?

    First, look at the size of the developer and publishers.  Big difference.  In order to have decent dedicated servers, they need servers (and enough of them) on, at minimum, every continent.  Second, look at players per march.  Dbd?  5.  CoD?  Up to 88? 

    Also, if dedicated servers are always better no matter what, why do fighting games, for example, actively avoid them?
  • Incarnate
    Incarnate Member Posts: 677
    edited October 2018

    @Chrona said:
    First, look at the size of the developer and publishers.  Big difference.  In order to have decent dedicated servers, they need servers (and enough of them) on, at minimum, every continent.  Second, look at players per march.  Dbd?  5.  CoD?  Up to 88? 
    Also, if dedicated servers are always better no matter what, why do fighting games, for example, actively avoid them?

    There are smaller studios, smaller than what BHVR was when the game was released, who've actually set up dedicated servers for a little less than the double amount of players, in various regions, so not being a large studio isn't a good excuse, because it's certainly doable, and not really as costly as it's being made out to be. Also, it certainly also depends on if they're making use of 3rd party services or trying to do it all themselves - I can tell you there are cost efficient alternatives, but of course if you want to profit the most, you'll put the expense on the players rather than your business.

    Another important part to mention, p2p has some serious issues, not just internet safety issues, but also the fact that if host has any network or connection problems, EVERYONE will suffer for it. Just take a game as Warhammer: Vermintide - End Times, that game is p2p, a great game with a network model that everyone playing the game suffers for, like for instance when you're going for legendary loot, and even when it's possible to get all possible three in one game, that just gets ruined because of a connection issue - in this case it was steam that went down. My point is that we the players are the one that suffers from them choosing a p2p model, them putting the expense on us.

  • MhhBurgers
    MhhBurgers Member Posts: 1,758

    @Dudddd said:
    TheBean said:

    @AppyB said:

    By not having dedicated servers you comprimise the safety of your player base. Anyone can look up the ip addresses of the other players they're connected to in a game with relative ease and then launch a DDoS attack. I have stopped playing dead by daylight after someone in my friend circle who I've had fallouts with in the past has started ddosing me and I suspect he will also ddos others I play with and try to blame me. I ofcourse can't prove it was him but this must also be an issue many others are facing. By not having dedicated servers you put us all at risk by playing your game

    What a weird ass post....

    Get a VPN if that is a major concern.

    Change your IP address. How would your friend keep getting your IP address if you changed it?

    How the [BAD WORD] would they ever be able to blame you? Other then just verbal BS.

    Stop trying to fear monger. If you are that concerned about exposing your IP address, then get a VPN.

    A fanboy White knight has appeared, hello fanboy may i eavesdrop into your ridiculous idea to play on a vpn . Why should the customer go through all the hassle to protect their information ? Its like paying for insurance that doesn’t cover you. I understand all logic diminishes when your fanboy senses kicks in you cant control the idiot thoughts spewing from your braincells. 

    Can't take anybody seriously who thinks of online safety as if he was some important hotshot worth targetting in the first place.

  • Kilmeran
    Kilmeran Member Posts: 3,142
    edited October 2018

    Never mind. I just don't care anymore. Why should I? BHVR obviously doesn't.

    Post edited by Kilmeran on
  • Fibijean
    Fibijean Member Posts: 8,342

    @Jed said:
    Ok I have a question for the people here acting like dedicated servers are worse. Why does the newest call of duty game have dedicated servers. Why would a big very popular and competitive online game like that have dedicated servers if they are worse?

    The point people are making is not that dedicated servers are objectively worse. I don't think anyone's arguing that. The point is that for the specific situation of DbD, they cost a lot of time and money, because the game wasn't designed for them. Plus, there are disadvantages, for example if you live somewhere remote that isn't close to any regional servers (assuming they have the money and manpower to even run regional servers in the first place).

  • Radiant
    Radiant Member Posts: 187
    Is not server cost is game refactoring cost.

    Emptygarden was built to be competitive and become famous that's why it had servers.

    It failed miserably but that proved that dedicated server is not an expense bhvr is not willing to do.

    Please keep in mind that in dedicated servers killers would try to hook themselves with frustration without their constant lag advantage.
  • Orion
    Orion Member Posts: 21,675
    edited October 2018

    @Radiant said:
    Is not server cost is game refactoring cost.

    Emptygarden was built to be competitive and become famous that's why it had servers.

    It failed miserably but that proved that dedicated server is not an expense bhvr is not willing to do.

    Please keep in mind that in dedicated servers killers would try to hook themselves with frustration without their constant lag advantage.

    If you play with high ping, that's your fault. Stop blaming P2P and just admit you made bad choices and are not as good as you think you are.

  • MhhBurgers
    MhhBurgers Member Posts: 1,758

    @Radiant said:
    Is not server cost is game refactoring cost.

    Emptygarden was built to be competitive and become famous that's why it had servers.

    It failed miserably but that proved that dedicated server is not an expense bhvr is not willing to do.

    Please keep in mind that in dedicated servers killers would try to hook themselves with frustration without their constant lag advantage.

    "lag advantage" 0,1sec difference between you and the killer, as survivor you can choose the lobby and if the ping is too high (100ms+) then just leave. 0,1sec doesn't make a difference at all in a slow game like this.

  • Jed
    Jed Member Posts: 254

    @Chrona said:
    AppyB said:

    It doesn't cost that much in relation to what they make to have demdicated servers. Even Friday the 13th has them and that game is dying. It's more than just an ethical responsibility to have them. Otherwise you just end up with a toxic community that goes around ddosing each other. That's not good for the game or the reputation of the company. It's pretty bad that I can no longer play this game with my friends because someone in our group is ddosing me who I have no way of proving and he claims he's being ddosd by me and I highly suspect he will do it to some of my other friends. It's not only fair that they protect the player base, it's a necessity 

    You do realize that EVERY first party game for every console, as an example, has been peer to peer?  Most games are p2p.  End of story, really.  Only major games made by giant developers have dedicated servers really: unless, for example, its friday the 13th who are lefally prevented from creating ANYTHING else for the game.  I mean, if you have literally nothing else you're legally allowed to do...

    Also, run a VPN. 
    Jed said:

    Ok I have a question for the people here acting like dedicated servers are worse. Why does the newest call of duty game have dedicated servers. Why would a big very popular and competitive online game like that have dedicated servers if they are worse?

    First, look at the size of the developer and publishers.  Big difference.  In order to have decent dedicated servers, they need servers (and enough of them) on, at minimum, every continent.  Second, look at players per march.  Dbd?  5.  CoD?  Up to 88? 

    Also, if dedicated servers are always better no matter what, why do fighting games, for example, actively avoid them?

    Yeah I know the COD games have more money backing them and make way more money then DBD.

    You say "In order to have decent dedicated servers, they need servers (and enough of them) on, at minimum, every continent."

    Um ok.

    COD games haven't always had up to 88 players and comparing it or DBD to fighting games is just apples to oranges. Fighting games are mostly 1vs1 and 2d anyways.

    But again the main reason (like everyone pretty much keeps saying) is money. Peanits respone seemed to suggest dedicated servers are worse. I on the other hand never said dedicated servers are better. I only question why would any company spend big money to buy and maintain servers if they are worse. The Friday the 13th game added dedicated servers a while back for console players. Why would the makers of F13 spend the money on those servers if it makes the game worse? If a dying game like it (around 500 players or less daily on steam) can afford servers then why not DBD?

  • akbays35
    akbays35 Member Posts: 1,123

    @Fibijean said:
    Short answer: it costs time and money they don't have, because they're prioritising other things. At the end of the day, it's your choice to play the game and put yourself at risk. Legally, the devs aren't responsible for anything that happens to you because of a P2P connection while playing their game. Whether they're ethically responsible, however, is a whole other argument, but people who run businesses tend to give ethics a backseat if there aren't legal ramifications.

    To be fair, I don't think the devs are heartless monsters. I imagine from their perspective it goes something like "this is a risk to our players, but fixing it requires a lot of time and resources. We need to prioritise making money, because a) if the company goes bankrupt then there's no game at all anymore, and b) we need lots of money to fix this issue".

    yet they put servers on Death Garden....

  • MhhBurgers
    MhhBurgers Member Posts: 1,758

    You do not need that kind of security and if you do you most likely are somebody who has his own company at which point I say: tough luck capitalist.

  • ScottJund
    ScottJund Member Posts: 1,118
    Can we just do a show of hands of people on this forum who have been provably DDoS'd via DBD?

    Gonna just take a wild stab in the dark and say that number is 0.
  • AshleyWB
    AshleyWB Member Posts: 4,061
    I kinda feel that they have been trying to implement dedicated servers for a while but they're keeping it quiet so it only goes live when its fully complete.
  • Chrona
    Chrona Member Posts: 245

    @Jed said:

    @Chrona said:
    AppyB said:

    It doesn't cost that much in relation to what they make to have demdicated servers. Even Friday the 13th has them and that game is dying. It's more than just an ethical responsibility to have them. Otherwise you just end up with a toxic community that goes around ddosing each other. That's not good for the game or the reputation of the company. It's pretty bad that I can no longer play this game with my friends because someone in our group is ddosing me who I have no way of proving and he claims he's being ddosd by me and I highly suspect he will do it to some of my other friends. It's not only fair that they protect the player base, it's a necessity 

    You do realize that EVERY first party game for every console, as an example, has been peer to peer?  Most games are p2p.  End of story, really.  Only major games made by giant developers have dedicated servers really: unless, for example, its friday the 13th who are lefally prevented from creating ANYTHING else for the game.  I mean, if you have literally nothing else you're legally allowed to do...

    Also, run a VPN. 
    Jed said:

    Ok I have a question for the people here acting like dedicated servers are worse. Why does the newest call of duty game have dedicated servers. Why would a big very popular and competitive online game like that have dedicated servers if they are worse?

    First, look at the size of the developer and publishers.  Big difference.  In order to have decent dedicated servers, they need servers (and enough of them) on, at minimum, every continent.  Second, look at players per march.  Dbd?  5.  CoD?  Up to 88? 

    Also, if dedicated servers are always better no matter what, why do fighting games, for example, actively avoid them?

    Yeah I know the COD games have more money backing them and make way more money then DBD.

    You say "In order to have decent dedicated servers, they need servers (and enough of them) on, at minimum, every continent."

    Um ok.

    COD games haven't always had up to 88 players and comparing it or DBD to fighting games is just apples to oranges. Fighting games are mostly 1vs1 and 2d anyways.

    But again the main reason (like everyone pretty much keeps saying) is money. Peanits respone seemed to suggest dedicated servers are worse. I on the other hand never said dedicated servers are better. I only question why would any company spend big money to buy and maintain servers if they are worse. The Friday the 13th game added dedicated servers a while back for console players. Why would the makers of F13 spend the money on those servers if it makes the game worse? If a dying game like it (around 500 players or less daily on steam) can afford servers then why not DBD?

    For one, again, match size. Even in the "good ol' days" of CoD, the match sizes were typically 8-12 players. That's a good amount more than DbD. Ignoring that, think about function, if every player swapped during a match in CoD, it wouldn't matter. If the killer disconnects, the match ends, period. Why not have the one player the match is pinned on be the host? Plus as far as latency, it wouldn't change much. They need to look at their netcode more than shopping for hundreds or thousands of servers. Laggy people will sstill alag exactly as they are now.

  • Michiko
    Michiko Member Posts: 623
    My friend actually had to email psn and report a Survivor who got mad they were sacrificed. They had all his information and threatened him. This is a very real thing. Dead by Daylight is the worst community for people to have access to that stuff considering how tilted everyone gets but I understand the time and profit that has to go into making such a thing & also not everyone is out to get you just because one bad apple is. If they have the resources to make dedicated servers, they will.
  • Fibijean
    Fibijean Member Posts: 8,342

    @akbays35 Again, I suspect that was much easier because they built that into DG's business model from the start. So it was written into the code of the game, and they had dedicated staff for it. Plus, DG only has servers in the US, Europe and Asia. DbD's player base is much bigger, so they would need more servers than DG ever had if they don't want to lose a bunch of players (which DG wasn't in danger of because it was a new game to start with).

  • Chrona
    Chrona Member Posts: 245
    Michiko said:
    My friend actually had to email psn and report a Survivor who got mad they were sacrificed. They had all his information and threatened him. This is a very real thing. Dead by Daylight is the worst community for people to have access to that stuff considering how tilted everyone gets but I understand the time and profit that has to go into making such a thing & also not everyone is out to get you just because one bad apple is. If they have the resources to make dedicated servers, they will.
    While a dedicated server could help with that, so could a vpn.  Plus (I'm talking out of my depth here now), I'm sure that some kind of IP address masking or something could be added to the netcode to prevent this issue
  • akbays35
    akbays35 Member Posts: 1,123

    @Fibijean said:
    @akbays35 Again, I suspect that was much easier because they built that into DG's business model from the start. So it was written into the code of the game, and they had dedicated staff for it. Plus, DG only has servers in the US, Europe and Asia. DbD's player base is much bigger, so they would need more servers than DG ever had if they don't want to lose a bunch of players (which DG wasn't in danger of because it was a new game to start with).

    the player base is just twice more than sc2. There's a lot of bad decisions that BHVR have done to this game and it still has a stable player base, but I think that's due to the weird combination of random terror and goofy bugs that make this game hilarious.