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!
Does anyone else think that Behavior should pull an operation health for dbd?
Push back any new dlc for a season
And Just focus on:
- Balancing the game
- Fixing bugs
- Optimizeing the game
And any other things that would make the game better for everyone
The game has a myraid of issues, And Fixing them slowly one by one between killer releases, or worse, wasting dev time on bandaid fixes, just Isn't doing it so far, IMO.
Best Answer
-
We need:
The full perk rework contest
This is a contest in which every underused perk will be looked at, and the devs agree on turning that perk into the most upvoted suggested version of it.
To solve the underlying issue for balance in this game.
Through the introduction of 3 new gamemechanics: (Chapter 3, Section 3)
Link: Solution to the Death-Efficiency Problem. Solving the game's biggest issue
and the specifics on how these 3 new game-mechanics are used will also be up to a vote.
To address the tools that are given to SWF's for free
Because SWF's get so many things for free through the availability of communication, we seek to close the gap between Solo's and SWF's.
Because it's problematic for the game to have 2 different power-units play under the same rule, we make sure that we create the mechanics that will solve this problem and make it fair for the killer.
6
Answers
-
but i like new stuff : (
4 -
yes, yes and yes.
SURVEILLANCE is 1 year old.
We need two operation health for DbD.2 -
yeah new stuff that makes the game unfun and sucksMyNamePete said:but i like new stuff : (
1 -
Lol an operation health for this game would take a full year.4
-
Very unlikely, but yes I’d appreciate a big balance and fix patch.5
-
Let's call it:
We're about to do a pretty good job so far...3 -
I would be okay with this.1
-
Agreed.
Or at least fix the long hair cosmetics. If I wanted to play Sindel I would open Mortal Kombat.0 -
Yes please, I love new content but I'd rather them focus in balancing and fixing bugs before releasing anything else.4
-
I'd love that. Instead they decided to release Darkness among us" Break the came completely with 2.4.0 And now they are trying to milk us with skins.
4 -
The masses of actually useless perks really really really need revamping or quality of life changes.
As for optimization, I don't think it's ever gonna happen, this game somehow consistently runs worse and worse every patch.
1 -
Just got kicked from a game because the killer was lagging so bad.
I lost a pip for it.
Yeah this game needs fixing.1 -
I would be fine with a patch where instead of getting a killer we get a large scale fix to the game.
0 -
If they would do a Project Health, it would probably come after the next killer release, once the road map ends. I think they are going to slow down quite a bit after this one. I think they overextended themselves this year and they're starting realize it.
0 -
I suggested this a long time ago. Let the cosmetic team do the work for cosmetics and get the rest power of all the coders and balancing team to fix this current mess1
-
You are the minority. If they don’t create content to sell, they don’t make money. Everyone who has bought the game already is nice and all, but that money is done. A company that isn’t bringing in new money is dead.EntityDispleased said:Just focus on the optimization and bugs for a while first. I don't care if we don't get any new content (other than quick to do events like the winter one) for a while, just as long as I can see improvement in the overall gameplay.
New players come with new content. It replaces players who’ve moved on, provides cash, and even gets some players back who, hopefully, also kick in some coin.
Fixes are good- but new content keeps the lights on.0 -
Outfits for income.EntityDispleased said:Just focus on the optimization and bugs for a while first. I don't care if we don't get any new content (other than quick to do events like the winter one) for a while, just as long as I can see improvement in the overall gameplay.
Bugs and balance for overall improvement of game quality.
A new Killer/Survivor is all well and good, but if the game doesn’t work then it’s worthless.0 -
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
We need:
The full perk rework contest
This is a contest in which every underused perk will be looked at, and the devs agree on turning that perk into the most upvoted suggested version of it.
****LE GASP****
That'd require actual community interaction.0 -
@se05239 said:
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
We need:
The full perk rework contest
This is a contest in which every underused perk will be looked at, and the devs agree on turning that perk into the most upvoted suggested version of it.
****LE GASP****
That'd require actual community interaction.It'd require the devs to kowtow to Survivor demands, you mean. Survivors outnumber Killers 4 to 1 (or thereabouts). Any such vote would be flawed.
0 -
@Orion said:
@se05239 said:
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
We need:
The full perk rework contest
This is a contest in which every underused perk will be looked at, and the devs agree on turning that perk into the most upvoted suggested version of it.
****LE GASP****
That'd require actual community interaction.It'd require the devs to kowtow to Survivor demands, you mean. Survivors outnumber Killers 4 to 1 (or thereabouts). Any such vote would be flawed.
Oh, yeah. You're right. It's basically the survivors picking what perk they want, even if it is for killers..
Damn, haha.0 -
@se05239 said:
@Orion said:
@se05239 said:
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
We need:
The full perk rework contest
This is a contest in which every underused perk will be looked at, and the devs agree on turning that perk into the most upvoted suggested version of it.
****LE GASP****
That'd require actual community interaction.It'd require the devs to kowtow to Survivor demands, you mean. Survivors outnumber Killers 4 to 1 (or thereabouts). Any such vote would be flawed.
Oh, yeah. You're right. It's basically the survivors picking what perk they want, even if it is for killers..
Damn, haha.That's why community feedback is not accepted as the gospel truth. Or, as I heard Mathieu put it, is taken with a grain of salt.
0 -
Divide the Survivor vote by 4 when it comes to perks.
(Or multiply is with whatever ratio you believe you deal with; if you think 25% of the survivors vote non-biased then multiply the survivor vote by 0.33)
We can also look at suggestions for new perks and translate it to "Amounts of seconds stalled" / "Amount of seconds it slowed the game down" and use that as objective measure.
Then we look at how frequent you are able to meet the conditions and adjust the numbers slightly if we see it as easy conditions to meet.Since the developers hold the final vote, it still going to help us see where the community want to see things moving and as long as we don't promise that the most voted perk ideas are used, we're safe.
Since 90% of the community doesn't know much about the interrelated mechanics that are at play in this style of game, listening to the community would solve 1 thing and break the next, but it should still give us a lot of information and ideas and dayum;
This game has 50+ perks per faction but it feels like there are less than 10.
0 -
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@OrionDivide the Survivor vote by 4 when it comes to perks.
(Or multiply is with whatever ratio you believe you deal with; if you think 25% of the survivors vote non-biased then multiply the survivor vote by 0.33)
We can also look at suggestions for new perks and translate it to "Amounts of seconds stalled" / "Amount of seconds it slowed the game down" and use that as objective measure.
Then we look at how frequent you are able to meet the conditions and adjust the numbers slightly if we see it as easy conditions to meet.Since the developers hold the final vote, it still going to help us see where the community want to see things moving and as long as we don't promise that the most voted perk ideas are used, we're safe.
Since 90% of the community doesn't know much about the interrelated mechanics that are at play in this style of game, listening to the community would solve 1 thing and break the next, but it should still give us a lot of information and ideas and dayum;
This game has 50+ perks per faction but it feels like there are less than 10.
There's no way to know who is and isn't biased, or even what side they main. There are other problems as well. What if someone owns multiple copies of the game, for example?
The devs listen just fine. They read suggestions. They answer questions in the Q&A streams. What people are complaining about, in fact, is that the devs don't do as they want. They conflate "listening" with "doing what is requested", and therein lies the source of the complaints.
0 -
There's no way to know who is and isn't biased, or even what side they main. There are other problems as well. What if someone owns multiple copies of the game, for example?
Then we can still take a look at the perk and translate it into numbers. Perhaps their proposed numbers are off, but we can change them accordingly. It is often the problem with a perk proposal, the structure of the perk. Their bias will most likely show in the numbers that they give the perk and we'll tone them down when we need to.
The devs listen just fine. They read suggestions. They answer questions in the Q&A streams. What people are complaining about, in fact, is that the devs don't do as they want. They conflate "listening" with "doing what is requested", and therein lies the source of the complaints.
A part of that is correct, but I'd also add that a part of this listening is not revealing the conditions on which they would accept an idea.
For example, take our conversation about Self-care being part of the base kit of survivors.
My stance would be to fix the game in such a way in which survivors after the death of teammates remain to have a reasonable chance to survive, meaning that you aren't team dependent.
Less dependent game play also heavily rewards stealthy game-play as you not rushing objectives doesn't mean that you'll lose when (some of) your teammates have died.
Because of this stance I promote mechanics that lessen dependency.It could be that the Developers do not want this at all. Maybe they believe that the death of 1 should likely amount in the death of all, as this would discourage stealth as well and they believe stealth is bad, because they believe that what is so addictive about their game might be all the stimuli gained from continues interactions and where as stealth can create very exciting interactions for the survivor, they wouldn't know how to make it so that the killer would receive the same amount of stimuli on that side, making killers more likely to quit.
Both approached have valid points, but we know too little at what the Developers would listen to and what they believe about their own game.
There are a few things we know: Killers predominantly for fun and not competitive, etc.
If players had a better picture of what the Devs believed about their game then we'd already know the answer to this:https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/34144/public-poll-all-seeing-vs-blindness#latest
or many other issues.
I could go into reworking the whole Ranked system in DBD and turn it into an actual rank system, but I know little what they believe the purpose of their rank system should be.
Do they deliberately make it so that everyone in the game can be rank 1? Do they have the Escape + BP + Emblem system run at the same time so that the players always feel that they've won somewhere on some front? Or is the emblem system just a failed attempt at formulating a players contribution to the match?
It's this part of us not knowing what the Devs WOULD listen to that adds to much of the confusion.
Of course there are a lot of impulsive players (maybe very young) that will shout whatever they believe at that moment is the problem and of course that will be ignored and these people have already reduced themselves to a meme, but as for the rest who could see the game going both ways, we often don't know where the Devs would take it, while we'd be able to come up with solution and ideas for either way.0 -
Firstly solved error 8014 we are can't join any server 4 days.0
