General Discussions
General Discussions
Why isn't data from thing such as that killer kill ratio chart publicly available?
I think it would be a great idea to make this available to the public, at the moment only the devs are able to see things like statistics. I think it would be great if we could actually see the data that is relied on. It would allow players to see exactly what they can only assume such as the most survivor sided map.
Being able to see statistics would probably help many players understand certain things we have wondered for a long time.
I say that they should be made publicly available.
Idea from @ReverseVelocity
Comments
-
People say "BuT tHe CoMmUnItY wOuLd MiSiNtErPrEt ThE dAtA!"
We wouldn't know that for sure until the data is given to us. Besides, it's not like behavior is correctly interpreting the data they have right now. So what's the harm in letting the community see it?
8 -
For April fools, they should release a chart of fake date and have clown or something on top.
1 -
Hm. Yeah, it only happened two times, pretty sure this will not happen a third time. /s
7 -
Because people would probably say "I only lost because my killer is weak, look at the killrates!" instead of getting good.
2 -
Statistics gathered from certain platforms certainly could be prevented from being publicly released due to NDA's or other privacy concerns. This is why playercounts for consoles is private while steam is public.
0 -
What concerns though?
0 -
Yeah, they'd probably have to release tons of data and how they went about collecting it. Though many of us like to think ourselves staticians, many aren't.
0 -
Because to be perfectly honest, its like throwing kerosine on a bonfire.
5 -
Really? Would everyone freak out over it in a bad way?
0 -
And what evidence do you have to support this claim?
0 -
Just check their Privacy policy to see what they collect.
0 -
A barely working matchmaking system is evidence enough.
0 -
I highly doubt that is a problem in most of the matches. What I see most is potato survivors being demolished by killers, unless in a SWF.
0 -
They have shared the stats before.
0 -
uhhh have you played dbd?
0 -
The kill rates for different killers? Those were pretty inaccurate and they have much more data than just that.
1 -
Do people suicide on hook and DC in the game? Yes. But where did the devs said they count those in the released statistics?
Thing is, if a lot of survivors dont wanna play against a specific killer they don’t like then it must mean something. I see this a lot with Freddy.
There isn’t some hidden agenda here lol
0 -
I do get those games too, but I also have games where survivors give up and just focus on getting points instead of winning.
I just mean to say that any stats they give us dont matter because of the flawed matchmaking. If I gave a test to 5 year old and the same one to 25, BHVR would weigh them equally.
0 -
Its because most of it doesn't matter and they know it. There's just a 101 different variables, thats why nurse has the lowest kill rate and Freddy C tier Kruger has the highest. It says nothing about the killers because you need the context of nurse being really hard to play and people killing themselves against Freddy. Speaking of suicide our toxic community does that a lot, but stats cant show that context. The only thing stats would really show us is the massive power divide with SWF and they already acknowledged its a problem and that they'll never fix it because SOMEONE lacks the spine to actually tackle these problems out of fear of upsetting survivor mains
2 -
But they always release two graphs. A general one and a red-ranks only.
A killer in the red ranks is usually smarter than most survivors in it btw, so I don’t see matchmaking being a problem here, cause that’s what they take into account when balancing the game.
0 -
I think it's natural to think that about red ranks but it's just not that hard to rank up in general. It's not about being good, but just going down a check list. There's also the issue that both sides are required to farm the opposition to some extent. A great killer/survivor wont rank up if they finish the game too quickly. I'm sure all of us can think if a time some posted something like "help! I ranked up too fast and I'm not having fun".
0 -
Only ranks are not skill based, so matchmaking is a big problem if you want to balance around it.
0 -
Look at what happens when they release data wile saying "THIS IS EXTREMELY MISLEADING. NEVER USE THIS IN ANY SERIOUS WAY. PLEASE, JUST DONT EVEN BOTHER. THERES SO MUCH IT DOESN'T ADRESS OR TRACK."
2 -
Except they use these same stats to base the entire balance of the game. Freddy will be getting nerfed soon it's been confirmed.
1 -
Because it causes massive arguments in the community.
There are so many variables and things we don't know, that it's impossible to draw any conclusions from them. All it serves to do is act as a good will gesture from BHVR (which I appreciate) and it incites arguments in the community.
0 -
Because the datas would actually show that the game is way more killer sided than people pretend.
If they keep releasing nerf after nerf there's a reason behind it. The avg forum user doesn't have a tool to analyze such datas and giving him those raw stats would just make this community that is already whiny even worse.
0 -
Would you be so kind as to explain how this game is killer sided?
2 -
The killrate on the latest stats was 68%, not everyone plays swf and if you play solo you know that you're not gonna win most of the times unless you are satisfied by "getting a pip". For every 0k two other killers are 4king
0 -
The informations provided by those graphs and stats are ridiculous. They lack explanation and I get the impression that the sole purpose of them is to make a point.
I would not be surprised if those numbers are completly made up just so that they fit their agenda. Statistics are made to manipulate the common people, there's no easier way than to show stats of "Something" and people will form their opinion based on that. A beautiful mindfuck for all the apes on our planet.
So, keep in mind;
The only statistics you can trust are those you falsified yourself.
1 -
You can’t balance an asymmetrical game around the 1% top players. If most of the survivors struggle, the devs are gonna adjust the killers accordingly.
0 -
Fair point. But we all know survivors give them money.
0 -
They never released data. Only data based stats like average killrate. The OP is asking for actual data/stats the devs have. That's of course impossible from a privacy/company secret standpoint. But it's different than to give us an average killrate of a killer without any information about perks played, maps, variety of kills, offerings, how many gens were powered when survivors were sacrificed/killed and what else they might be able to track.
With all that information making strange arguments would be harder, because the same data can be used to point out flaws and wrong conclusions by other community members.
0 -
They could give us the most accurate and explained datas they can come up with and people would still complain. They want to balance the game to make it fun for the majority. 2k and 2e balance idea is not random, it's literally nash's equilibrium where you get the majority of players satisfied and happy. 3 players will be satisfied and 2 won't, balancing in any other way would make the majority unhappy. This is an asymmetrical game with 5 players there's no pareto's optimality.
This is a videogame, it's not a job. I get that some players, especially one streamer are so immersed in this game that they want it to be their frustration relief tool where they can overpower the opponent to feel that sensation of superiority but there's no need to say that if they feel that need dbd will never solve their psychological issues.
The fun police mentality is pretty childish and lame in a party videogame.
1
