http://dbd.game/killswitch
Any response from BHVR why time limited skins are in a paid game?
Comments
-
Who said I'm special?!
1 -
Yes, as much as I am defending them having holiday outfits as time limited, the fact that they are retroactively making past outfits seasonal, I am not okay with that. I mean, I have the ones I care about already so its not a huge deal for me, but like you say, why are the Winter Tales ones being removed?
2 -
if you don’t know the difference then YES this discussion is definitely needed.
0 -
You did when you said “we deserve better.” I didn’t develop the game, I don’t advocate for game sales, I don’t make YouTube videos advertising the game. So I know I don’t deserve better than what they have to offer. They want to do what they do that’s fine, I’ll prepare and plan for other moments when I can commit to their criteria.
0 -
So what you're essentially saying is that you're a lemming that would follow other lemmings off the cliff, because like lemmings its natural to follow the herd even though it isn't logical and will lead to your doom. You deserve better than that. We all deserve better than that.
When I see bad practices I call them like I see them. You, yourself in this thread agreed with me that costumes should be sold all year round. However now you're trying to pull the "you think your entitled", "you think your special" garbage because you have no actual valid arguments left. News flash no one is special and anti consumerism is bad for everyone.
extremely distasteful and unoriginal take. Do better.
5 -
It isn’t a bad practice what they are doing, it’s a good practice for making money. As for the lemming reference, I disagree with you completely, there is a complete difference between just and unjust. I don’t agree that they should change what they want to do, it’s their game. So I’m following no one. Just because you don’t like it, you feel you can just huff and puff and yell “I don’t like this, change it!” It’s true, you do have the right, but you doing it doesn’t mean anything. You aren’t special, you’re not a beautiful unique snowflake. Your sand in an ocean of sand. What BHVR is doing isn’t anti consumerism because you, and a few others don’t like it. You really need to research that definition if you want to argue in the name of it. I agreed that costumes in relation to cosplay should be sold all year round, and since you must equate it here than all DBD cosmetics should be made available in PUBG all year round. - Do better
3 -
I do find it weird that people use the excuse that ppl cant afford it now etc in order to reap the benefits to get the cosmetics for free. Its just a skin. It has no competitive play or advantage if you get it or not.
0 -
A few is a fancy way of say majority. Seems like most of us here are displeased with this with only a couple people supporting it.
4 -
Most people don’t give a crap
2 -
it must be nice living in narnia.
4 -
There's also those of us not supporting it nor being upset about it. We are neutral and unbothered because we dont care about cosmetics. Just thought I'd bring some recognition to the third group!
1 -
My soul? What? Are you just confusing me with someone else or projecting?
and if you can excuse it like that then why should we care about the person that gets hurt just because others are able to buy that Dark self outfit you talked about in February?
it’s okay if you personally don’t have a problem with this practice. But others have the right to criticize this without you attacking them (and yes calling others ‚special‘ over this is an uncalled for provocation and therefore kind of an attack)
also, as others have already stated, we are not even sure what the state of the game (nor the person wanting to purchase that outfit) will be next year/release cycle.
5 -
Time-limiting an item for the sole sake of it being time limited is not an artificial constraint, ok dude, idk what to tell you anymore.
Keep defending anti-consumer tactics, I'm sure that'll work out fine for us, the consumers 👍🏻
6 -
Yeah, you're most likely a troll. That's confirmed.
No way you take things THAT literally.
3 -
What!
You can user flowery language, but when I do im a troll. INCREDIBLE!
1 -
Ok, let's try this:
The wound is the fact that the store is going to have a reduced availability of choices: this is impairing my ability to see all my options when trying to decide which skin to buy.
I was able to do that before, I will not be able to do that anymore. That's a negative effect, that's the wound.
Are you satisfied or are you pretending to see physical blood?
5 -
Most of the playerbase isn't even on these forums. Therefore, you cant at all claim to be a majority. You may be a majority among the minority on these forums, but you're still a minority among the entire Dead by Daylight playerbase.
0 -
Yeah, I would never describe that as a wound.
0 -
Well said. I have no interest in buying time-limited cosmetics, particularly when the only option is Auric Cells.
This made me actually lol.
1 -
Your assuming that people that aren't on these forums wouldn't also take issue with this. Also when I said majority I meant in these discussion threads. Although every single person I've talked to not on the forums think it isn't right either. We don't know how the entire playerbase would act because most aren't even aware yet. I can't wait for after January when people see these skins gone and are in for a shock because shocker most players don't bother to read the newsletter, which is clearly evident by the people on the forums.
Most of my playstation friends don't even play right now because of the bug that should've been fixed in hotfix one. So they didn't even know about old skins becoming time limited until I let them know.
1 -
That sounds like those people that are telling people with depression to just stop being sad and be happy instead.
you realize people can have different feelings and perceive things differently and that doesn’t mean one way has to be right and the other wrong, do you?
no one tries to change your personal point of view here and no one tried to silence you
2 -
For real you are comparing me to an abuser of depressed people? Wow. Sorry for disagreeing with the flowery language then.
0 -
So you know the players dont like either of these but chose to do them anyways? Why would you even admit to that that's kinda bad on your guys end
2 -
Someone is trying to tell you what they see as their wound here (after you directly asked them to and iirc you were the one using the phrase wound first) and your response is that you would never describe that as a wound.
2 -
Yes, I disagree. I dont deny him his experience. Jeez
0 -
tbh im glad they are. it couldve been a higher up decision, for all we know (hence why every complaint ive made has been at BHVR and not individual devs or other memebers of the team) and that mandy was able to communicate before the 4 weeks were over that they wouldn't be made available for shards is nice.
because can you imagine the backlash if that was revealed on december 29th or, god forbid, after it.
3 -
I was more so referring to flat out saying that the devs were aware that the playerbase would be unhappy with these changes IE time limited cosmetics and such.
0 -
Oh in which case let's hope that the devs knew that and the higher ups demanded it anyway, like what happens with regular skin distribution.
3 -
What I really don't get is the idea behind this whole limited time cosmetics change.
Like its understandable they think making something limited time = more money but does it really? Do they really think that all these people in the game will buy enough of these cosmetics in the little over 4 week span to make up for the potential hundreds to thousands who would buy them all year long? Especially ones like the onsies or pajamas which aren't holiday themed. I know I didn't want Mikaela's PJs when they first came out but I bought them a couple months ago in august when I wanted to expand my Mikaela wardrobe.
Leaving them in the store makes it more likely that people who don't main that survivor will buy them while making them limited time only makes it to where no one would buy it unless its for your main. I have no intention on getting Meg's, Mikaela's dress, Kate' (Im a Kate main its just ugly), or Tricksters to where I might have gotten Meg's and Trickster's later down the line if it was permanent and I wanted to play them more. IMO it just seems like such a bad and stupid decision even from a business's standpoint
5 -
Ok, how would you describe that then? Something to be happy about? Something to cheer for? A positive thing? Elaborate please.
4 -
I would describe it as an inconvenience if anything.
1 -
And why should we defend things that inconvenience us?
9 -
Forcing more and more FOMO features is a garbage business practice that promotes exclusivity only to those who can afford it.
This is only made more obvious by limiting the purchase options to Auric Cells only, which when you take into account their "Everything will be available with Iridescent Shards" announcement, makes it blatantly obvious they're trying to pressure players into purchases. This is not okay.
It sets a bad precedent for what people are willing to tolerate, and promotes trying to further monetize a game that still has over $100 of DLC to purchase if you get the Ultimate Edition.
3 -
Announcing that you will make items available for purchase with means other than real-life cash after one month, then putting out cosmetics that are only available for a month IS A SCAM. THIS IS A SCAM TACTIC. BHVR, please do not consider this Epic Games-level of predatory purchases.
6 -
Vote with your wallet. I've bought plenty of skins over the years, and every new chapter's content licensed or otherwise, from the store, with cash. Since the gameplay changes in 6.1, they have done nothing to garner good faith, and I have not purchased either of the new DLCs that have dropped since then. Only a matter of time before t'll be "Dead by Daylight 2" following the same pattern as Overwatch.
tldr; this consumer doesn't tolerate scummy business practices, and the only thing DBD is getting from me is a negative review on steam.
5 -
This is extremely disappointing.
Before the announcement where they said "all original skins will become available in Iridescent Shards following 4 weeks of its release", every new collection had 1 or more outfit immediately available for Iridescent Shards. With the promised change, all new collections immediately started releasing Auric Cells only.
Now not only all skins are guaranteed to be released AC only, we also have to hope they suddenly aren't "time limited".
Major L.
3 -
Just stop spending money on cosmetics fullstop. They dont care about anything but money.
1 -
Not us, I don't have a problem with it.
3 -
I think you guys should release stuff like this as a bundle option as well. I appreciate the communication. :)
0 -
Well, other people do and are rightfully complaining about it.
Did you have a problem with Christmas cosmetics being available all year round? If you didn't, why are you so against having that version of the store instead of this new time limited thing?
I didn't see anyone ever complaining about being able to buy a pajama (a PAJAMA is now a CHRISTMAS SKIN) skin in June
6 -
I don't think it's just us on this forum, y'all.
4 -
What is the problem with time limited cosmetics? If you like it, then buy it. If you don't like it, then why does it matter that it disappears?
1 -
Same reason they only make feng, kate and nea skins. Money
0 -
Why does this matter. So what they are limited. If you want them buy them. If you don't want them don't buy them. These cosmetics have no effect on the game and instead of complaining about cosmetics we as a community should be focusing in the game breaking issues like over spawning of items at all loops or the fact that major bugs are not being addressed quick enough in favour of cosmetics.
Anyone complaining about cosmetics in this game kinda need to grow up because limited time cosmetics appear in all games. It's a way for a company to incentives sales to make money which they need to continue to support the game
3 -
You do realize that this game is not just about purchasing cosmetics, right?
I would agree with you if it were otherwise (and there were only auric cell purchases), but this is an online continuously maintained asymmetrical game of tag with objectives.
Costs need to be met, and content that brings people into, and back into, the game is a priority to keep the game healthy.
Part of doing the above successfully is by utilizing vices to bring people in.
Part of doing it while not insulting your consumer base is also by doing the above with transparency and understanding.
Then of course there’s morality to consider, target audience, and optics.
As someone with disposable income, who values my time, and understands that there are those who have more time than money, I’m fine with this shift in seasonal cosmetic offerings so long as previous years cosmetics are released with an associated shard price during their seasonal release.
2 -
Why would you be upset by this? Cosmetics are not something essencial, you can chose just not to buy the skins, if you care about them just buy it, or wait until it comes back. I think it's very silly just have things come back every year because it removes the exclusivity aspect of it, if something is limited it should never come back imo
0 -
If BHVR are able to make an estimated CA$300 million, open a new studio in Toronto, increase employees by roughly 30% and acquire Seattle based game development Studio Midwinter Entertainment then I don't think they're that strapped for cash that they need to turn to FOMO.
3 -
I recommend some of y'all who defend this move to watch this video by MintSkull. Just watch it all the way through and don't force yourself to have a "hot take". 🤦♂️
4 -
Acquiring a studio, building a studio, and increasing your workforce involved taking on increased expenses to maintain that growth, especially when it comes to payroll. How do you think they're gonna pay for all that?
0 -
I'm sure there are plenty of people working at BHVR who could've looked at the costs and gone "Hm maybe this is too expensive and we should tone it back and go for a more long-term development plan" instead of doing it all in a single year and needing to resort to FOMO to keep the funding going.
When you look at something and see that it isn't feasible based on current data, you usually increase your resources (revenue) before deciding to reinvest the profits and become more dynamically efficient and not afterwards.
3
