Kill Switch update: We have temporarily disabled The Legion due to an issue that allows for infinite power spam. The Legion will be re-enabled once this issue is fixed.

http://dbd.game/killswitch

Would you guys rather have the devs take risks or play it safe?

FrostySeal
FrostySeal Member Posts: 634
in General Discussions

What I'm trying to say is, would you guys rather the dev's play it safe or take risks with a Killers power? An example of the dev's playing it safe would be the all-kill chapter as Tricksters power isn't that complicated and an example of the dev's taking risks would be the Binding of Kin chapter since they did something they've never done before with a Killers power.

Tagged:

Comments

  • Phasmamain
    Phasmamain Member Posts: 11,543

    I’d rather they play it safe. I’d rather not have another nurse

  • Eninya
    Eninya Member Posts: 1,256

    They're going to catch flak regardless of what they do, so they should at least stay in line with creativity. I think their original content is great, even if balance/gameplay interaction isn't where we want it to be.

  • Shroompy
    Shroompy Member Posts: 7,937

    Why not do both? What we need is a separate gamemode to test out upcoming changes, kind of like the PTB but you don't have to opt in and out. Benefits for doing this? console will also get to test these things out and I'm sure the devs would actually have time to gather the feedback from these tests and hopefully make the right changes.

  • Yords
    Yords Member Posts: 5,800

    Take risks, why? Cuz it doesn't matter if they create another twins, they are the only successful game of its genre at the moment. It's not like they would lose their customers (not for long at least). They should be doing that already to secure their place, but nope.

  • swager21
    swager21 Member Posts: 1,019

    play it safe. continuously taking risks would lead to the games demise very quickly considering the community is already what it is

  • TAG
    TAG Member Posts: 12,874

    I think they should take risks more than they currently do. Not completely through caution to the wind, but definitely spice things up a little more here and there. If they slip up a bit, they have the power to fix that with a patch.

  • oxygen
    oxygen Member Posts: 3,387

    It makes perfect sense if they want to play it safe sometimes. While it might hurt the "Wow!" factor of a chapter on release, it's generally more well recieved to release something that is later buffed than releasing something that might later be nerfed. Unless it's something practically universally considered busted or otherwise problematic of course, but it takes some seriously messy stuff to get to that point. Like release Mettle of Man / Legion levels of disliked.

  • Boss
    Boss Member Posts: 13,618

    I prefer a nice balance of both, but i'd put more weight on the scale of risks.

    Though i should say reasonable risks instead.

    A.k.a. Risks that are built on information they have, and not spent half their budget and manpower on it.

    I feel like more safety than we currently have will make the game too stale.

  • JesseJH28
    JesseJH28 Member Posts: 483

    Risks here and there. With four chapters released per year and already having so many characters available, I think they can afford to take a risk on one or two of them at this point, just probably not two in a row in case they flop

  • zombitehdeath
    zombitehdeath Member Posts: 587

    Take risk as it could help them if the perk is op or weak but it can give some insight on the buff and need they wanted to do.

    We can have meta change to keep the game interesting if they play it right and we can give feedback on what good and bad which they can learn from.

    They should also play it safe if it calls for it

  • Moxie
    Moxie Member Posts: 806

    Game will never improve if they don't take risks.

    I wish they would be more experimental with buffs and perk changes.

    If it doesn't work, revert the change. If it works, expand on it. So many dead perks in this game. It's tragic.

  • Xzan
    Xzan Member Posts: 907

    There is this thing called PTB for risks.

  • JustZed32
    JustZed32 Member Posts: 213
    edited April 2021
    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2087523#Comment_2087523

    you see, you are right, but about the info... i think Scott did a video recently(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ot2-1p_mrNs&t=607s)

    soo.... in short, Big data doesnt really work. i mean, you see, if we look at the big data, we have to buff nurse. but we dont, since she is the best killer already

    so yeah, they dont really listen to a feedback, but what can we do

  • Boss
    Boss Member Posts: 13,618
    https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2087643#Comment_2087643

    Owning information to me is more than raw data.

    Big data does work, just not on its own.

    Whether the devs are currently doing things right or not doesn't matter concerning my answer: I'd rather see reasonable risks than safety.

  • Friendly_Blendette
    Friendly_Blendette Member Posts: 2,923

    This thread why they cant do either, play it safe like they do most of the time people complain how slow changes are and how weak the new killer is and take a big risk like the new hud and movement and some people will love it while lots of people will hate it. They really just cant do either with this community lol.

  • immoraldemise
    immoraldemise Member Posts: 117

    Whatever generates the most cash imo. That's how its been for the longest time now.