http://dbd.game/killswitch
DBD community lack of knowledge on how licensing works is showing.
First of all, i get the complaints about not being able to mix ORIGINAL characters cosmetics.Because they are owned by Behaviour.
But there are literally people who ######### about not being able to mix licensed cosmetics.Do these people know how licensing works?Do they know what terms Capcom and Behaviour agreed to behind the scenes?Do they know that every last bit of this chapter had to be reviewed by Capcom and if they had something bugging them Behaviour is obligated to fix it?Do they not know that any license holder can take them to court if they don't obey?
This community is a lost cause.
Comments
-
Honestly I don't care for licensed cosmetics, I just want to use Jane's Goddess hair with a different outfit because it doesn't clip or anything.
Also Elodie's onesie head on top of her default clothes was hilarious but I don't think I'll miss it too harshly.
8 -
No you're wrong, the community is aware, they know. They just don't care, because it doesn't suit their wants.
We also need to keep pushing the narrative that the Devs dont care about the game, they're money hungry and are killer sided... Anything else to add to the list these days.π
21 -
Well, you can't expect people to know about that.
1 -
Donβt forget they are lazy. And survivor sided. Additionally to being killer sided. That switches up depending on the topic.
16 -
Actually at least after they have said so on the official Twitter and here on the forums multiple times, at this point, we can expect people to know about that.
4 -
If they could do it with older licenses, why not with the new ones? I believe it has little to do with licensing itself, but rather it's done to prevent certain parts of the cosmetics from clipping. In the end they're losing money, because sometimes I only like specific part of the set and since you can't buy separate parts, I won't buy it, simple as that.
3 -
What do you expect? Most gamers are entitled children.
0 -
I've seen a mix of both. Some people just don't understand, which I get. Not everyone knows everything. It's been said that the first step towards knowledge is the phrase "I don't know".
On the other hand - sadly, WAY more on the other hand - I'm seeing loads of people who honestly just don't seem to care one way or the other. They want their cosmetics, they want them now, and they want them regardless of what they have decided are empty "excuses" on the part of BHVR. Even many of the people who have claimed to understand licensing restrictions still spew venom towards the company for taking their unlicensed cosmetic bug away, without apparent consideration as to whether there could be complex issues behind that decision or whether BHVR has any moral ground to do such a thing. The reactions, by a wide margin, boil down to nothing more than "the company could fix the game but instead they took away a tiny harmless bug and now I hate them that much more". Some people have actually used terms like "I know for a fact" before proceeding to throw out nothing more than angry assumptions.
I've been trying to educate rather than criticize but many people already seem to have made up their minds not to care.
2 -
I don't think that is enough. The only way to be sure that people know about something is with you plant the information on their brains.
1 -
Different companies mean different attitudes. Its all really confusing, I can understand why Konami can be hard arses about their products, but Capcom is known for being pretty goofy. But whatever their decision is thats what BHVR has to follow
3 -
They can still make separate cosmetic pieces for newer licensed content as well. The difference is that the license holders now have the option for set cosmetics. And even older licenses may opt in and add sets later on.
0 -
"If tey could do it with older licenses why not with the new ones?"
Because Capcom is not Konami.And Resident Evil is an active franchise.Mind you.
2 -
Well to be fair, if BHVR wants to make money on cosmetics, they need people to buy them now and the way they want. If nobody wants a specific legendary cosmetic or only wants one part of it people won't buy it, simple as that. They're definitely losing money getting rid of the original cosmetic glitch.
0 -
That in and of itself should be a hint to people: If a company does something that costs them money, they probably have a pretty good reason for doing it.
2 -
And they could be losing even more money if their licenser takes them to court for breaching the license agreement by not fixing the glitch that messes up their IP.
This is the product they have to sell.
Sure, there might be better products they could sell, but they don't have those.
5 -
Yes I agree, the only people this is hurting in the end is themselves.
0 -
Some of their sets are not that good to begin with.If they want money they should hire younger people to create cosmetics.
0 -
While I agree that original cosmetics don't matter it's also the fact this is probably a "universal" fix, fixing all the legendary & linked cosmetics is I'm going to assume infinitely easier than "fixing it for this skin but not this skin" especially considering it's a glitch that uses lag to break the cosmetics, asking the devs to fix stuff constantly and then getting angry that there's a fix that doesn't benefit you is silly.
4 -
Maybe not. But it should be expected that people grow up and stop throwing around baseless accusations and conspiracies.
2 -
That went right over your head didn't it?
1 -
Whoever is responsible for the sets is still the one losing potential customers. I think it's still a valid complaint regardless of the reason.
0 -
Not really. Because people are unpredictable, so you shouldn't expect anything.
1 -
No, its a valid suggestion. "Please can we mix and match sets"
It's not a valid complaint, because it's not up to Behaviour, and it's not negatively impacting your game in any way, it's cosmetic.
1 -
All of this because of a cosmetic?
No i dont think so and its again not Behaviours word on what happens with licensed cosmetics.
1 -
I'm just dissapointed with the nonliscensed, there is no reason to link them together unless it was legendary, it just kills the fun with mixing and matching
0 -
People want to continue to exploit a glitch that provides them with something that the company did not intend for them to have, something which could potentially have legal repercussions for the company if left unaddressed. The company exercised its right to stop the glitch and even went so far as to explain why they did it.
People are still complaining because they don't like the answer and simply want to keep abusing the glitch regardless of the company's wishes or how it could affect them. In what way are their complaints valid?
3 -
I think what rubbed people the wrong way was the timing. The game is unplayable for most players, and they release a patch that quite literally just takes one of the few fun things in this game away. Thatβs personally what bothered me at least.
3 -
I've encountered a total of around half a dozen people who seem to understand this issue (there was another user's comment here as well but I'm tired and missed the quote). I'm glad that I'm not the only one who gets this, even as I struggle to comprehend how few people seem to even want to bother trying.
1 -
I've never said people, who exploit the system are in the right. I'm talking about actual complains, which results in BHVR making less money, because they're not interested in full sets.
0 -
This is totally understandable, I just wish that more people were willing to entertain the bigger picture (not you specifically, I mean the tide of people who only see the situation as one in which a careless and inept company cares more about robbing them of something that they happen to like for reasons that are not deemed to be acceptable).
It's very late for me and I don't quite know if I'm understanding you properly. It's alright.
0 -
Im sorry do you know something we don't? did you read the agreement between Konami and Capcom with BHVR? Because we didn't.
If you have a copy of it please share. Because BHVR said nothing about this topic yet.
0 -
And what are you saying with this?
0 -
Im saying don't do BHVR job. They need to answer us not you. If its because Capcom BHVR should come and explain it to us its that easy.
0 -
They answered
Multiple times Mandy came to a topic like this and said that they HAVE TO keep some cosmetics linked because of the agreements with the license holders.
If people choose not to believe them is not their problem
2 -
sadly most people rather belive in everything that leakers accout say then the devs themselfs and they cry that somthing isnt as it allegetly supost to be
1 -
Or even worse when they push "conspiracy" theories like "Developers hate us, they did this on purpose to spite us!" because they don't like something that was done in the game
Like Jesus Christ, be reasonable for 5 minutes..
1 -
For legendary sets, I totally get it.
For Cheryl, I do not understand why she doesn't have unlinked pants. Her skirt doesn't match the unlinked tops, she needs pants.
For Leon and Jill, I am annoyed that their old-school outfits are full-price despite one having a barely changed default head and the other having their exact default head. There's nothing to justify the price, and I don't understand why Jill is forced to have her default non-bloody head on her old-school outfit. Because that's the only other head choice, right? She has her default, and then there's her bloody P3 head. Why are only the remake versions of Leon and Jill allowed to be bloody? If the devs made prestiged versions of the old-school outfits, then I could understand the price. But no, it's a high-priced inferior product.
The devs haven't taken advantage of the option to sell sets that contain two linked pieces instead of three, and at this point the need for such a thing is obvious.
The devs have created a bunch of linked sets for original characters that contain three pieces, and plenty of times at least one or even all three don't have clipping issues. This is when people get especially peeved, and it bleeds over into everything else.
Unreasonableness begets unreasonableness. The way BHVR has treated linked sets, their reliance on three-piece linked sets when it's totally not necessary seems very unreasonable. So now, it's not surprising at all that people's response is also unreasonable, because the company's not even trying to meet them somewhere in the middle.
1 -
Can you share the link of Mandy's post? I think they only said they want to keep the image of the license characters. bhvr want that not others.
If you have other post please share it.
0 -
Do you really think Behaviour would fix a glitch that literally made them money?
People buy these sets so they can mix them with other cosmetics and everyone knows that.
They just shot themselves in the foot because of license holders.
1 -
i woudnt be so sure about that, not long ago there was a thread complaining about the RE survivors not sounding like their game version, and that hiring the voice actor to do a few sounds wouldn't cost that much.
0 -
i really do hate how much this community zigzags about which side the devs are on
like come on guys, they're trying their best here (mostly, some of the bugs that have stuck around for years and removing Spacebilly are inexcusable)
0 -
While you are right what they pulled was an ea move pay full price for something when part of it is a copy
1 -
The only character I had glitched was lisa and I understand that they legally have to fix that. The problem is the original characters should have never had linked sets to begin with, and now players are being taken away their freedom with that as well.
0 -
That is exactly the answer I was talking about
Keeping the image of a licensed character = License holders don't want us to mess with the cosmetics of their characters
I don't know what you expect, do you want them to send you the copy of the contract signed by Mr Capcom with all the info about their deals?
1 -
You could have just titled "The DBD community's lack of knowledge is showing" and your point would have still hit the mark.
1 -
Why would the community do that? Throwing accusations is easier than using logic.
1 -
I thought you knew something but meh. What is so hard about BHVR saying "License holders don't want us to mess with the cosmetics of their characters"?
0 -
Why would they remove something that made them money then?
I don't even need access to their agreement.
1 -
You do understand that this is a public forum, and phrasing something like that is like saying "Don't blame me! It's THEIR fault! They are the bad guys!" pointing a finger towards license holders, right? The very same license holders which could say "Yeah, we feel like our characters don't belong to DBD anymore, so we won't renew your license again, sorry π€·π»ββοΈ"
Do you think that would be the best way to keep a good relationship between the two companies?
1 -
So far, since yesterday alone, I have seen posts that claim:
- It "wouldn't cost that much" to hire the original RE voice actors
- "Matter of fact, I know that Capcom doesn't control what BHVR does because if they did they would have taken one look at Claire and said no".
- BHVR cares more about its shareholders than its customers
- The "integrity of licensed characters" line is just an excuse
- The company would rather take away things that people like than fix things that people don't
- This is no different than taking a car to the dealership for an adjustment and getting your car ruined in the process
- This entitles me to a full refund.
- People who lost the cosmetic glitch are victims
- There's "no reason" why BHVR can't (insert literally anything here)
- The game is unplayable and they don't care
- There's a streamer (or streamers) who agrees with us
- BHVR needs to explain this more
- The company is being too silent, this proves that they don't care and aren't doing anything to address any of the serious problems with the game
- Linked sets are a cash grab
- BHVR is losing money by removing the glitch
- A general attitude of entitlement, pattern of throwing out hyperbole and conjecture, and overall negativity based on the fact that a glitch was patched that they didn't want patched, which - combined with the fact that more serious issues persist and BVR hasn't given us daily updates and / or rewards such as total cash refunds - is concrete evidence that the company does not care and this is all just a calculated attempt to screw over its customer base that they clearly can't stand
...So uh, any room for logic here or should the rest of us just give up and enjoy fifty more identical threads complaining about how horrible the developers are treating them?
0
