Camping Contradicts BHVR's Terms of Use
Comments
-
If they wanted those parts of the EULA, which is a legal contract, to be limited to preventing someone's ability to launch the game, or access the game, etc... they would have said that. Instead they used the language "enjoy playing BHVR services". That language is more broad and absolutely includes in-game behaviors that prevent others from engaging in normal gameplay and having the ability to play/enjoy the game. Lawyers will not use broad terms like that if they mean something more specific.
1 -
No, cause Camping is an outcome of the way the game is played. You still have the ability to enjoy it, you are just not skilled enough to do it.
Its a nice try, but April 1st was yesterday.
1 -
You are using the words in the BHVR account EULA and trying to apply them to actions inside DBD when they do not apply.
A killer camping you to death is not preventing you from playing DBD. You were still engaging with survivor gameplay elements the entire time. If being camped in a match somehow prevented you from playing another match of DBD, then the EULA would apply.
Not to mention that the devs have already stated that camping is not a bannable offense.
You have no real point.
1 -
I think the issue is that you're under the impression that camping is unacceptable behavior. The people who made the game have sad and written multiple times that is not the case and the way these agreements work is that the final arbiter of what is acceptable is the entity that owns the platform. If we went the way your proposing the game simply could not exist because people would just call out anything that impeded their overall enjoyment of the game as an offense in need of punishment. While the devs and support staff wouldn't be obligated to act of frivolous claims the sheer amount of claims would be damaging.
Same with using third party programs, they can't actually actively monitor your system nor would you want them to have that level of access for a number of reasons hence they don't bother with taking actions on the use of teamspeak, discord, etc. Besides the very obvious things like exploiting and hacking, the only thing a player can really do that would break TOS is hold the game hostage which has become very difficult to due unless you hack. That has been the most consistent standard for a long time, like if someone traps you in a corner and just never lets you leave that is TOS breaking. If someone just stares at you until the entity eats you that doesn't really meet the bar as the game progressed normally just not in an equally entertaining way for both parties. That's an important distinction because a lot of what this game is designed for places players in positions where the adversarial nature of the game can really close to what could be seen as TOS breaking in any other game. As long as the game can progress to its proper endpoint and you're not doing any of the other things that break TOS in DBD you're usually fine.
1 -
You can't play the game, let alone enjoy it, if you are stuck on first hook until you die. If that happens because a killer is standing there camping you, they are actively preventing you from even participating in the match.
3 -
No, the survivor is playing. They're on the hook. That's part of the gameplay of being survivor. The survivor not enjoying that part of the gameplay is irrelevant, you can't ban someone for doing their objective within the game's rules just because you don't find their objective fun. You go in knowing that you can end up on the hook. If you don't like being on a hook, don't play survivor in Dead by Daylight.
If the killer is camping the hook, then the other survivors are free to do gens, which means the survivor on the hook is actually helping their team by keeping the killer busy. Some survivors keep the killer busy by leading him on a long chase, some survivors keep them busy by dangling on a meat hook. Preferring to keep the killer busy in a chase rather than on a hook is a preference.
Being on a hook is part of playing, so being camped on a hook isn't preventing you from playing. You are playing by being on a hook, it just doesn't feel very interactive. That's the truth of it. It sucks, but that's how the game's designed.
5 -
Where have the devs stated that camping is not a bannable offense? The only place I have seen this is in this forum and we are discussing how it contradicts the EULA. Once again the EULA does not say that you are not allowed to prevent a player from entering another match. If that is what they were intending they would have said that.
0 -
Cite some reference for why the EULA doesn't apply to actions inside the game. Other parts of the SAME list of items I referenced specifically talk about actions which would be use within the game, as I've already mentioned.
The EULA and TOS are documents which govern player behavior and code of conduct...while playing the game. It's not like they magically don't apply to the game itself, that makes no sense. If someone verbally harasses someone in the in-game chat it isn't magically okay because it's "in game". I really do not understand your logic.
1 -
Being on a hook is part of the game, You could equally argue being hooked robs you of your ability to play.
LOL the devs are gonna have a chuckle about this one for sure.
1 -
Being hooked once and being forced to stay there for all three hooks has nothing to do with skill. If the killer camps the hook there is no way to escape. This is why camping is interring with a players ability to enjoy the BHVR service.
3 -
Then they need to change their EULA to allow for preventing people to enjoy the game, because that is what this is. This is my whole point. The devs saying camping is "acceptable" violates their own EULA.
5 -
Not if being Camped is part of the game. Then it just means you are not enjoying the Service you are supposed to.
4 -
Being on hook is part of the game, being camped on 1st hook so you cannot play the game is not. I'm not complaining about hooks in general, that is part of the game. There is a gameplay loop that involves being hooked sometimes. That is fine. What's not fine is a killer forcing that loop to a halt for one player and not allowing them the ability to play the game.
2 -
Yes, being on a hook is part of the game and the survivors cannot complete their objectives if a killer does not hook someone. No one is saying that you shouldn't be hooked. The issue is when a killer camps the hook, forcing the player to progress through all three hooks.
Killers are not allowing other survivors to unhook the hooked player and are standing right at the hook (sometimes pretend attacking the player) as they progress through the hooks and die. This is not in-line with all the objectives and the EULA.
2 -
Not enjoying the game is different from being prevented from playing the game. If someone doesn't like hooks at all, they just don't like the game. Someone being camped to death on first hook is not even able to play. It's very different.
1 -
"Interfere with the ability of others to enjoy playing a BHVR Service or take actions that interfere with or materially increase the cost to provide a BHVR Service for the enjoyment of all its users."
According to this statement then people should be able to report each other for just about anything that is deemed unfun by the other side.
You could report a player for using flashlights, or using dead hard if you take this too literally.
6 -
Using flashlights or dead hard, etc... is not preventing someone's ability from playing or enjoying the challenge of playing. Camping someone to death on first hook doesn't allow them to even play. They can't progress, they have no good options. They don't get another chance. It is different from all of those other examples.
2 -
If that were the case then the game should give you points for being hooked once and staying until you die. Instead you get penalized (lose pips) for this and you have no control over it.
Also, No one is saying they don't ever want to be hooked. You are correct, that is part of the game and the survivors can't complete their objectives if no one is hooked. The issue is when someone is forced to die after on hook. They are forced into a gameplay that is interfering with their ability to play the game (or we would gets points for for dangling on a meat hook).
3 -
Then they are absolutely violating the same rule. Survivors are not immune to this either and should be held to the same standard, I 100% agree with that, but it is separate from the specific issue of camping that I highlighted.
2 -
I agree that it can't be a blanket statement of enjoyment of the game. If there are parts of the game that a player may not enjoy, like a flash light stun, but they can move on in that same match and continue to play. Camping is forcing that match for that player to be only hanging on a hook and lose pips. That is interfering with someone's ability to enjoy the BHVR service.
3 -
Y'all keep saying the same thing. But if the killer isn't camping, they just hook and leave, and the other 3 survivors don't save you, they should all 3 be bannable right? The results are the same. You were stuck on hook for the entire time, they kept you from being able to play the game because the let you die on hook. So all 3 should be banned right?
It's ridiculous to apply it to one side but not the other. DBD would have no players at that point.
4 -
The game sucks at rewarding points, that's known. For the longest time players who kept the killer busy in a chase didn't get rewarded for it, either. They're often still barely rewarded for it. The second stage of being on the hook does reward points, so at least there's that.
Killers lose points for things out of their control, too. That's a problem with this game. RNG and other players have way too much influence on your own points. As survivor, it often feels like my teammates have a bigger impact on my points than I do it feels. It's extremely frustrating.
The reward system in this game needs a rework. A lot of things in this game need a rework. Killers are not required to let survivors get off the hook. Nowhere is that said to be required of the killer. If a killer lets the survivor off the hook, they're playing nice. If survivors were meant to be guaranteed three chances, then the game would be designed differently. If the game wants killers to not camp, it needs to be designed differently. The game gives the killer the option of keeping someone on the hook until they're dead, so some killers take that option.
Camping the hook is actually the most intuitive way to play the game. Most times in life, you do one task, you complete that task, you move on to the next task. Spreading your attention between all four survivors and pressuring gens, that's not intuitive, and the game certainly doesn't teach killers to do it. So again, if killers aren't allowed to camp, the game's design has to be changed.
3 -
It's a bit different with the survivors because they aren't standing there forcing you to stay on the hook, but I do think survivors refusing to help the team is a separate issue. I don't know that it would be "bannable" because they didn't put the person on the hook and they aren't keeping them on the hook.
I don't think slippery meat is a real solution to this stuff, but if the killer isn't standing there, technically you could boost your luck and jump off the hook on your own. You at least have some options if you find that survivors are often not unhooking you. That doesn't work for camping though...they will just hit you since they are standing right there. So, it's different.
1 -
The entire point of flashlight saves is to prevent the killer from hooking the survivor.
Hooking the survivor and activating the corresponding perks is part of the killer's game play.
Thus flashlights prevent the killer from playing that part of the game causing the issue.
As for Dead Hard it prevents hits and thus causes the above by different means.
Same goes for ALL STUNS IN THE GAME! As a stun inherently prevents you from playing for its duration thus using pallets/head-on/Decisive Strike would also violate EULA according to the way you interpreted it.
So lets not argue semantics anymore as that part of the EULA is meant for people who prevent the game from ending at all. Aka things like holding the game hostage by body blocking a survivor in a corner(As either role). Camping/Slugging both cause the game to end so they don't count even if it takes a while.
2 -
Its like saying body blocking is against terms. Just stop! It’s game play… I’ve camped maybe three time in my whole time playing this game and believe me if you have a good team camping is NOTHING. I’ve been blinded, stunned and confused while camping and had survivors win. It’s you and your teams skill level. Sorry bout it.
2 -
I am not trying invalidate anyone's experiences, but who does this happen to, really? Every game? Even every other game? I'm skeptical. This seems up there with the "I ran the killer for 5 gens" tier of exaggerations for effect.
I have played a lot of survivor (~1K hours, I would guess), and while I have certainly experienced quite a bit of camping, the number of times I have been facecamped more than once in a single day is really low. Two or three games in a row, even rarer. More than that? Never.
I may be presumptuous here, but I think a lot of people have very loose definition of camping, and like tunneling (where this is even more pronounced), they feel like they are being camped, but really are not.
But I suppose this comes down to how people define these things. And I know I am limited by my own experience, but I find it difficult to believe people are out there getting camped every thing game, or even half the time.
As for the topic, I think it's only really camping if the killer is given reason to leave the hook (no other survs around, gens getting done), but refuses to. The team has to give the killer a reason to leave the hook. If I hook a surv and immediate see other survivors moving in like vultures, I will probably hang out. That isn't camping, that's crap surv play by the team. While on hook you might not be able to see everything that is going on.
And the law of averages would indicate that for every time you get camped, there's going to be a time your teammate is camped, and you are ignored.
0 -
I think for some people this is not the right game to play.
... but but but i have the right to win. Nobody has that.
That is a player vs player game - with 2 opposite goals to achieve. If one side is better it will always be annoying or frustrating for the other side.
Killer has to kill - Survs have to escape - by any means. That is the game. That has to be the fun.
How you achieve this is irrelevant - as we know - Kills/Escapes=Skill.
You have to accept that - if you like it or not.
1 -
yeah punish SWF not SoloQ you think we give a sheet, we don't even play duo here lol if we did i wouldn't have to lose rank every other Nurse match.
0 -
you haven't seen otz play do you? lol he doesn't need to camp all the time, not in the first hook and he doesn't push it to death hook.
Killers just want to camp kill cause they're bad and its easier to kill a person who couldn't fight back .
2 -
You misunderstood my entire post. Not sure if you did that on purpose, but I'll just assume you only glanced at what I wrote because the post was lengthy.
I never said killers "need" to camp. Ever. I called camping both an option and the intuitive way to play, but neither of those imply necessity at all.
You should also try harder to bring something meaningful to the conversation in your replies. First you use a streamer who plays the game for a living as an example (the average player is neither a streamer nor do they want to hear about how streamers do things), then your second paragraph has a negative emotional undertone as you throw baseless insults at an entire group of players. Killers may be the survivors' opponents, but the person playing your opponent is still playing the game with you, and you need them for the game to exist. Seeing it any other way is unhealthy for you as a person and for DbD as a whole. It's also a waste of energy to insult people who don't care, you could put that energy into something constructive.
3 -
This is what’s wrong with people on here, there is no enjoyment when you wait 10 minutes to join a match only to sit and watch on a hook until you die as you’re being camped / tunnelled.
Its why a lot of people think swf is justified, but most of us just want a less sweaty match where we can casually play and have fun and not worry about waiting loads of time to get into a match only to be camped the entire time.
1 -
The stun prevents you from playing the game for a very short duration, not the remainder of the match until you die. You can continue to do you objectives and play. There is a big difference.
1 -
I never said you were entitled to three hooks. The game is designed to have a chance to get off the hook. Camping prevents this thus interferes with the players ability to enjoy the game (do any objectives).
2 -
I'm very glad to hear this isn't your experience with the game. Unfortunately about 80% percent of my matches killers are camping. It's not always me but they make it impossible for us to help the hooked survivor. Many of these matches where the killer is camping they will completely ignore me while I stand right next to them. If I take the player off the hook in front of them they grab the same player. If I have another survivor there trying to get in between the killer and the hooked player I am unhooking they ignore us both. Whether this happens every once in a while to you or about 80% of the matches like me doesn't change the fact that this gameplay shouldn't be allowed. I lose pips in these matches as well.
2 -
I don't think anyone has the right to win. I very much enjoy this game, whether I survive or die, when I get the ability to play it! It's not true to say you can win by any means though. All games have codes of conduct and objectives for you to complete. DBD already recognizes that some gameplay isn't allowed. I wish they would add more features like the crows that give away your position if you stand in one place too long. I've played matches where a survivor did literally no objectives. They ran around the map hiding. Eventually they were the only survivor left and after about 2 mins of the killer searching they killer had to open the door to end the game. This shouldn't be allowed either. Maybe a solution would be if a survivor hasn't done any objectives for some amount of time the crows show up until they do something. I don't know what the answer is but camping does interfere with the hooked players ability to do any objectives (enjoy the match).
1 -
I don't mind playing with a killer who is a challenge or if I die. But camping does prevent the hooked player from doing anything. Like you said, who wants to wait in a queue just to be hooked, camped and killed. Whether I'm the survivor hooked or not is irrelevant. The hooked player was not allowed to play the match. This isn't hook simulator.
1 -
If being camped were part of the game then you would get points for being stuck on the hook from first hook to third hook. As the game is now you lose pips when you are camped. Also the should change the game description to hook simulator.
1 -
There was a time long ago when if you stood right in front of someone on hook you basically blocked them from being unhooked. True face camping.
They fixed this by making unhooks possbile from all angles. (rotational unhooks).
The counter to modern face camping is smashing out gens and coordinated saves. Its not easy but its possible. If you are getting grabbed during the unhook you aren't baiting the hit.
New players get caught by this, its why it works well at low mmr, veteran players get really tilted by this and make bad plays as a result, its why it works at high mmr.
Its not the most interactive play but when you aren't getting good return from commiting to chases switching up to hook defence often pays off.
You've grossly misinterpreted the meaning of this line... "Rules of Conduct", it says it is a violation of the Terms of Use to "Interfere with the ability of others to enjoy playing a BHVR Service or take actions that interfere with or materially increase the cost to provide a BHVR Service for the enjoyment of all its users."
It does not mean "I didn't have fun, so it's my opponents fault ban them" that's idiotic.
2 -
But that is my point.
You are playing - even if you get hooked - because this is part of the game. It still is a team game. Your team should save you. AS you should save others.
If you don´t like that - that is your problem and maybe then not your game. But you are playing.
And you can´t dictate how anyone "has to" play. If some want to be silent and do nothing it is up to him and probably bad your team - but then it is that way. Nobody is forced to do anything.
If he manages to escape then - as we know - this was a pretty skillful play.
1 -
I disagree. The player on a hook that is being camped is not able to play. Unless this game is now becoming hook simulator. The killer staring at you and pretend attacking you while you progress through all three hooks is not playing. Also, many times the other survivors try to unhook the player and the killer ignores them and re-hooks the survivor immediately. This is the gameplay that I am saying is interfering with the ability to do any objectives (enjoy the game).
1 -
That is a "counter" in a team sense, like if you are assuming a 4-person SWF who thinks of themselves as a team, but "smashing out gens" does nothing to help the one person being camped to death on first hook. They lose pips, lose out on bloodpoints, can't complete challenges, and ultimately just can't play the game. That is the problem. It's not about what "wins" or not, it is about one person being prematurely forced out of the game. It would reduce the harm somewhat to give camped survivors more points, but that ultimately doesn't solve the issue of them not being able to play.
"Rotational" unhooks don't stop the killer from picking up the survivor during the unhook animation, nor do they stop the killer from tunneling the person who was on the hook and hooking them again (something these killers often do, even when someone used BT). That is the kind of behavior I think should be reportable. There are plenty of scenarios when a killer might stay near a hook for a bit to bait people out or determine where other survivors are, and that's fine because...they are going to be chasing other survivors when they get the chance. That's not what I'm talking about. I only mean persistent, stubborn camping of one specific survivor until they die, thus removing all ability for them to really play the game.
0 -
If you want to call it that way then yes, it can be a hook simulator at times.
And you are playing the game - you can´t move as you are hooked. But you are playing.
A killer can do camp if he wants to. It may be super frustrating but this is also a part of the game.
Some teams manage to save - had this today - and some don´t.
And yeah - you sometimes get camped - had this today - or you get instakilled by a Devour Hope Myers on RPD on the first chase - had this today.
But also as survivor you may get goot teammates and a not so good killer. And the team blinds him and runs him around adn so on.
That is also not nice for the killer - had an annoying flashlight squad today. Man is this satisfying if you get them.
That is all part of the game - again - you may not like it but that is up to you - that IS the game.
And if you think about it - i think you don´t want to have somebody tell you how YOU HAVE TO PLAY the game?
Can´t do this and can´t do that. Nobody want that.
1 -
Being camped is "playing" DBD in the same way that being in a penalty box is "playing" hockey...i.e. it isn't playing at all. If someone throws a hockey player over the wall into the penalty box in the first few minutes of a match, and then stands there and physically blocks them from leaving the box, the player in the box is not "playing" the game.
Being hooked is a normal part of the DBD gameplay loop. The brief periods of being hooked are fine because it is part of the shifting objectives of the game. A killer camping someone to death on first hook is breaking the flow of the game. It isn't that being hooked is an issue, it is that forcing someone to stay hooked is short-circuiting their death. You are forcing them to miss the gameplay loop, forcing them to not really be able to play the game.
The type of camping I'm primarily talking about is when a killer hooks someone and camps until they die on first hook. That means the killer is ignoring their own gameplay loop as well. They should be chasing people, damaging gens, etc... but instead they are just standing around waiting for someone to die. It breaks the game to do that, especially from the start of a match, and imo it also violates the EULA due to the survivor not being able to even really attempt to play the game for that match.
1 -
Neither of those actions prevent anyone from playing the game. It's not about people being upset, it's about them not even being able to *play the game*. It has nothing to do with whether they live/die or whatever, it is just about them not even having a chance.
1 -
No, that example doesn´t work and you should know that.
And also no, as much as you want it to be "illegal" - the killer can play this way if he wants to.
The team can try or they just do gens and escape. Part of the game.
We know that often the team tries and fails and therefore makes it work better than it should maybe. And if the killer only kill one that is his problem (or not really).
You are missing the point that the whole and only goal of the kiler is to kill you. You can talk against that all you want.
The nature of the game is to make you feel angry and mad - and sometimes extremely joyful - i still think this is its key success point.
The engagement is really high. I like to compare it to Dark Souls. It is hard and frustrating and there is no easy mode. You love it and bite through it and get rewarded for your successes or you hate it.
1 -
"The nature of the game is to make you feel angry and mad" -- this is absolutely untrue. What? I have never, ever heard anyone make that argument. The nature of the game is... to be fun. Just like any other game. Sometimes, in the process of that fun, there are challenges and frustrations that make it even more fun when you over come them. But that is a perfect example...being facecamped to death on 1st hook does not give that survivor the opportunity to overcome any challenge. They literally just can't play. They are stuck, unable to do anything, until they die.
"No" is not a valid argument. You're going to need to explain why my example doesn't work. It seems valid to me.
When you just respond "no" it says to me you really aren't thinking about it and instead you're just saying you don't like it. It doesn't matter what you like or don't like, what matters in the context of the EULA/TOS is that they are adhered to fairly so that all players (BOTH killers and survivors) have an equal opportunity to enjoy playing the game.
1 -
I agree. This is why I'm commenting on this here. If this is truly how they want the game to be played it doesn't line-up with their EULA. If they decide DBD is now going to be a hook simulator game that takes away pips for something that is completely out of your control and isn't enjoyable in any way when it happens (and happens far too often) then good luck finding and keeping survivors to play in your matches.
1 -
No, a EULA is a legal document. Whether or not something is violating it is not solely up to BHVR. They are free to change the EULA if they want, but facecamping someone to death on their 1st hook and refusing to chase any other survivors that come by, etc... is objectively violating the current EULA. Maybe BHVR wants to allow that behavior, but then they need to change the EULA.
0 -
Maybe you don´t understand it but that is ok.
"Sometimes, in the process of that fun, there are challenges and frustrations that make it even more fun when you over come them."
That is the key sentence.
You sound pretty angry to me with what you don´t like and want to changed so that you can play. Angry and mad is not bad it is just psychology.
Don´t you feel extremely good when you barely escape or get hooked twice at the beginning of the match (happened to me today with a billy) and your team turns this though lost match and gets 3 escaped at the end?
Not always - but the more frustrating something is - the higher the feeling of overcoming it. Has something to do with the energy you invest in it. (Or you just hate it)
Again - like Dark Souls :-)
0 -
... out of curiosity, you do know BHVR is working on a way to discourage camping within the game, right? It's not an easy fix, because everything they've tested in the past is easily abused by halfway-coordinated survivors, but the devs seemed pretty optimistic about their current idea when they mentioned it in a recent stream. Even if they don't go through with that one, I doubt they'll just give up.
Most people, including the devs, don't want killers standing around staring at a hook for two minutes waiting for someone to die. But the point of this thread is to encourage banning people who camp, and that's not a reasonable response to the issue. It's highly unlikely they'd ever make it bannable because if nothing else it's not enforceable. They'd have to hire a ridiculous number of people to deal with the fact that every match from now until the end of time would be reported for a camping killer, and most reports would be thrown out, but BHVR would still need people to look at each report individually. It's an unreasonable ask.
2
