Out of curiosity, who is holding the game hostage?
Comments
-
hate·ful
/ˈhātfəl/
adjective
- INFORMAL
- very unpleasant.
- "I don't have to stay in this hateful place"
Also, it’s unfortunate that’s all you got from what I said. Have a nice Holiday!
0 -
Because the survivor in the locker has been checkmated. Not throwing matches to allow others to get achievements is not the same thing as already having lost and spitefully denying them.
2 -
Make the tomstone work on a survivor on the ground - /fixed.
0 -
Also, allow Michael to kill survivors in lockers.
Unfortunately I think that BHVR is avoiding fixing this because they don't want to touch his power or ability at all. If they were to make these changes they would probably also include changes to Michael's entire kit.
0 -
It's really sad to read how much some killers hate survivors and how some survivors hate killers. If the opposite position wasn't in the game, there would be no game to play. Simply stating something doesn't make it a fact, it's your opinion. I think neither is holding the game hostage as both have things they can do to push the match forward. Now, that's an opinion.
Facts are the definitions of holding hostage that BHVR has laid out. I can only recall a couple of instances that are actually holding the game hostage. One instance is if the killer actually has the survivor's body blocked, so they can't move anywhere, and the killer doesn't attack. The survivor in this instance has no recourse except to wait it out or DC. Another instance that would be considered taking the game hostage is when survivor(s) decide to just hide instead of completing their objectives.
0 -
It doesn't make them a bad sport if the killer is refusing to kill them via a hook. The killer is refusing to do their objective just because they want an achievement (and it's an achievement for a reason).
1 -
The survivor is also refusing to do their objective though, they aren't gonna escape by sitting in a locker.
1 -
They would be throwing their objective if they allowed the killer to just mori them.
Their objective is to survive and escape - by going into the locker they are trying to survive because they could still potentially wiggle off or jump off the hook Lol.
3 -
I guess using a tombstone is very hateful then as it is unpleasant to be instantly killed in dbd, I hope your holiday is swell too!
4 -
I might have DS, I may have head on, I may be far enough to wiggle and get hatch - but of course survivors have to instead hand the kill to killer or it's toxic, lol.
Killers always say it isn't on them to make the match fun for survivor so why is it on survivors to make it fun for killers?
4 -
So the killer could be throwing away a guarenteed kill by grabbing out of the locker.
2 -
But they can more than likely get the survivor out and on a hook.
It takes 16 seconds to wiggle off - which is more than enough time with hook proximity.
The survivor's ONLY option of surviving is by staying in the locker or engaging in actions that would block out the instant mori. The killer can STILL kill whether its by bleeding the survivor out, hooking them or mori-ing them but the killer is refusing to do any option which is holding the game hostage.
Don't be obnoxious, no one is entitled to an achievement and just play the game.
2 -
if you've been in the locker for over a minute in this stand-off, you don't have DS†, and if you have head-on, why aren't you using it? You're constructing a very elaborate scenario here where the Michael is carefully out of head-on range this entire time and there are distant hooks.
As I said, unless the map position is very favourable, there is nothing to be gained from squatting in a locker for five minutes except to deny the mori. You have no reason to deny the mori except being petty, as this is an achievement that has a pretty massive factor of the Survivors playing along--it's really easy to get into a locker if you don't care about being stealthy as soon as the terror radius announces itself.
And people do this all the time even if there's no chance they're wiggling free from a hooking. It's not like there aren't videos of this build, and Survivors will jump in the shack lockers of all things. Or lockers right next to a hook. There is no chance of the Survivor winning in this situation except the Killer letting them, so why not let them get the mori? It's not like you get stabbed IRL. Killer might get the achievement, everyone goes to the next game. No ten minute staring contest.
† Also, this is against tombstone myers going for a 4k via stabbing. DS is even less of a factor.
1 -
Im not being obnoxious, I'm just pointing out your hypocrisy.
If the survivor is progressing their objective by staying in the locker giving them a slim chance at escape, then the killer is progressing their objective by preventing that slim chance from happening. Even if there was no achievement this would still be the correct play in terms of the killer guaranteeing a kill.
You cant have it both ways either both are at fault for not progressing the game or neither are at fault for not progressing the game
1 -
Neither.
The killer could just pull the survivor out of the locker but they aren’t.
The survivor could just leave the locker but they aren’t.
Myers could kill the survivor but is refusing thus refusing to progress the game, however the survivor is also refusing to progress the game as remaining in the locker is not doing anything either. Neither player is in a situation where the game can’t end, they are both just refusing to play.
It’s kind of like the old hatch stand off. In that scenario, both waited for one to make a move but neither were holding the game hostage as both could end the game at any moment.
2 -
No because the Survivor's last chance at survival is to jump in the locker - or stun the Myers out of the mori by vaulting/doing a gen and etc - locker generally being the best because it has no time constraints.
In this situation, the survivor is already in the locker so the best chance they have is to stay in the locker, hope the killer takes them out and that maybe the killer won't be able to hook them in time. The killer still has several options in this scenario to kill the survivor - they DONT need the survivor to exit the locker to kill them.
It's not hypocrisy, it's entitlement to an achievement and stubbornness holding the game hostage - because nothing is stopping the killer from killing the survivor.
1 -
Except for the fact that if they do take the survivor out of the locker as you acknowledge there is a chance the survivor may wiggle out and have a chance to escape. Whereas if they wait until the survivor comes out it is a guarenteed kill, or if the survivor stays in the locker until the match timer ends the match they die that way as well. So the best move the killer can make is to wait for a guaranteed kill.
Its nothing but survivor entitlement and stubborness holding the game hostage because nothing is stopping the survivor from trying to escape.
1 -
It's not on the survivor to offer themselves as a sacrifice, ever. The killer just needs to hook and go next.
Most people are hung up on the 'survivor not trying to escape', but does it change anything if the survivor is on a gen just missing every skill check until the killer leaves? No, it doesn't.
Besides, if it's 'help him get the achievement', fine. I'll start feeding myself to every tombstone Myers, but only after every killer stops slugging for the 4k. Apparently it's on the killers to offer me the Left Behind achievement, just in case I don't have it yet.
1 -
Yea sounds like the killer should have just pulled me out, and I've never seen a Myers in this stand off stand directly in front of the locker they're always a little bit away and off to the side, idk what's so elaborate about this scenario lmao.
Just pull from the locker it isn't that deep 🥰
1 -
or
just accept the mori
I really don't see what you gain out of possibly denying someone an achievement when you can acknowledge you've already lost the game.
Like, it's a simple question: What. Do. You. Gain. Is there anything in it for you other than the idea that maybe you've stopped someone else from getting a little digital checkbox? You come out of the locker--you lose. You stay in the locker--you lose. You lose either way, so what's in it for you to drag it out five minutes, ten minutes, an entire hour, other than denying someone else a specific achievement?
If you lose either way and there's no point difference, what is there to defend.
1 -
I already posted a picture of me getting tombstoned yesterday by a Myers, I had BPS (my swf friend had a flan) because I was doing the 50k BP challenge where was my leniency when he moried me at 8K lmao? Ima do as much as I can to get as much bp as I can, and guess what? They already had the achievement so idk why I'm supposed to just throw points away because achievement or something lol.
4 -
That's whataboutism. We're talking about a situation where you've already lost no matter what choice you make. You don't gain or lose any more BP based on what you do from this point.
The only thing that changes is if you get stabbed, or you get hooked. Myers may already have the achievement, but on the other hand he might not.
It's an interesting little ethical assessment, because your only option is whether you deny someone the chance to get a minor reward or not.
2 -
I get blood points for wiggling, it's in my best interest to be carried to a hook, and it's an interesting ethical assessment, not carrying survivors to the hook is only denying them the chance of a minor reward or not. Especially in the given scenario from the OP where the supposed person is the last alive implying the other 3 are already dead.
3 -
So, we're weighting the ~1000 max BP you can get from being carried once if the hook is sufficiently distant but not distant enough to get free
vs
Potentially an achievement, and if this run is failed, the cost of two Iri addons (8000 BP minimum, ignoring all the other filler to have these come up).
From a purely economic perspective, it's a net negative (they have to spend another 8k BP) if you sit in the locker. From every other one, you're just timewasting.
Your argument has amounted to 'maybe I'll get 1k BP!' Really? You're going to sit in a locker for an hour over 1k BP? You could squeeze multiple games in there. You don't want someone else to maybe get an achievement or sense of satisfaction that much that you're willing to stop playing for an hour, and your justification is 'there's 1k BP in it for me in this game'?
0 -
"Potentially an achievement" - Okay, and where are my free achievements? I can't even get a glyph while injured in front of a killer most times, not sure why I'm going to be handing out 4Ks. Are you implying all survivors should give up and allow the kill to happen after the first tombstone, after all it is an achievement and it clearly has so so so much value... or something.
I'll say it here as I know killers love saying it, it isn't on the players of the opposite team to make sure you have fun, I do not owe killers anything and they do not owe me anything.
and why should I care how much they've spent on addons, it is their choice, I don't see killers caring about everyone's items when they're running franklins etc, the entitlement here is so funny to me I'm expected to care about a killers points they've spent, my friend and I brought in a flan and bps, flan, an item you literally can't get anymore and we were subsequently killed at below 10K points to a myers who already had the achievement.
and yes, my blood points are more important than someone else's achievement, I didn't get the achievement handed to me when I did it.
6 -
Honestly, i hope you get me sometime, I am very strict when it comes to giving hatch but if while I'm looking for hatch after the 3rd kill I see a survivor working on the last gen instead of running around looking for hatch or hiding, I respect the hell out of them for not giving up and let them finish and escape. It even cost me my 1st attempt getting adept knight, but theirs is much harder so I gave it to them.
0 -
Simple conclusion: Neither side is entitled to make the other person play nice by letting them get an achievement out of some courtesy move. As long as neither side is preventing the other side from bringing the game to a close, neither side is in the wrong for refusing to budge. Ut just means that both sides are wasting their own time.
3 -
People will run the most rigorous mental gymnastic obstacle courses to convince themselves they aren't being spiteful and bitter in this community, it doesn't even surprise me anymore. Being selfish isn't directly against the rules, but people want to rationalize it so hard to convince themselves they aren't. It's kinda concerning when you take a step back. This isn't even about something balance related or anything like that, its just being willing to waste everyone's time to deny the other side out of spite. Its why I always just took the swing or took the leap and risked getting grabbed during hatch standoffs, the only thing being accomplished is bitter denial. I'd rather the one who has a forced consumable investment get the goal, especially when it is very obvious that is their intent.
Like just alt tab out for the animation or go up to the kitchen and grab a drink or something while it plays if it bothers you that much. The only other possibility would be if it bothers you that they achieved their goal that much, which would be spite.
2 -
Going to clear one thing up here, this is not a hostage situation - this is more of a standoff, either party could end this. A hostage situation is where one player can do nothing to prevent the game from progressing.
10 -
Came for the cringe replies and circular reasoning.
Left satisfied.
4 -
1000% incorrect
the survivor has a chance to escape via grab, the survivor has no chance of escape in a chase setting against a killer that instantly mori's them.
The survivor is surviving
the killer is not killing.
3 -
But their hostage taking rules by definition include facecamping but that is allowed and favored, so can't go by bHVR's so called rules lol
0 -
No as even when you're being camped your game is progressing as the survivor is dying.
3 -
But as was said....the killer is preventing the survivor from playing the game normally for their part. It's a double edged sword...killer mains don't see it, but survivors mains do. Killer is doing his job but preventing survivor from doing theirs. Just fact, no bias as I main both. And to prove the point, a killer doesn't even need a kill to get max points, which is the ONLY goal of DBD. There are no other end game goals...that's also a fact.
0 -
1000% incorrect
The survivor has a chance to escape via grab, the survivor will 1000% die in the locker.
The killer is killling.
The survivor not escaping.
0 -
no, as the survivor is dying on a hook - this is part of normal gameplay for survivors to die. This is why it's not against the game rules and not a hostage situation - the game is progressing.
3 -
The survivor can choose to exit the locker and be killed at any time.
Myers can pull the survivor out of the locker at any time and put them on a hook or take a chance letting them wiggle off.
Neither side is held hostage. It is a standoff.
BHVR never considered old hatch standoffs a hostage situation back in the day either.
2 -
Myers for refusing to pick the survivor from the locker.
2 -
Total stalemate imo. Both equally to blame.
2 -
Yes that was my original point in a post way back in this thread, I said its either Both or neither, and am now just pointing out this persons hypocrisy to them, for fun.
1 -
It's one of those situations where both people are choosing to deadlock themselves. Not super fun, but they have the right to do it.
2 -
That is irrelevant. The survivor could jump out and go work on a gen or open the gate.
1 -
You are being a deliberate troll at this point lmfao
3 -
Neither really. It's basically just a hatch stand off where the first one to blink loses.
1 -
Yeah, there is no "hostage holding" going on here. Some people refuse to accept that jumping into the jaws of death is still progression.
As for who is being a bigger jerk, it's a tough call. If the surv is the last alive, I'd say it's 50/50 at best, probably more on the surv, since they're dead either way, and the killer (ostensibly) is at least doing it for a reason (Evil Incarnate). At that point, the only reason the surv has to stay in that locker is spite.
If there are other survs alive, then the killer is clearly more in the wrong.
3 -
The glyph challenge is a good point. I can count on the one hand the amount of times a killer has let me finish a glyph when I finally spot one during a chase. It's commonly accepted that one has to earn their achievement or challenge, and not at the expense of anyone else.
There was that survivor main who posted a couple days ago that he made it clear in his username and bio that he was trying for an achievement and he felt killers were intentionally going out of their way to make it difficult for him, and general consensus was that he, rightly, wasn't entitled to the other sides help.
1 -
I haven't got the achievement but survivors who do locker strat just put me off trying. It's another MMR thing. I can't be dealing with trying to play Myers against the average players who just above my paygrade.
There's the fallacy of survivorship bias (nothing to do with survivor/killer but only looking at successful Myers).
0 -
This has been needed since hackers taking game hostage and disabling EGC.
0 -
Exactly why I haven't even considered trying. So, I have to not only get my T3 up before the gens are done, and kill three of the survivors, I then have to get the jump on the fourth one before he goes into a locker? With a plain ol' 115 M1 killer, who can vault fast.
No idea what I'm meant to be doing to 'earn it' by the fourth kill if everyone adopted that attitude, since it comes down to the Survivor being either too dumb to work out what's going on or no lockers anywhere in the area (which isn't exactly common map gen).
0 -
You do realize that you're not in the majority who understands the purpose of the game...IT IS NOT to kill every survivor as fast as possible. IT IS to get as many points as possible. Camping and tunneling make you lose points while max points can be easily obtained with just 8 hooks....don't even need a kill. Until players learn the real goal of DBD, they should have no say in strategies or anything cause they are 100% making up their own rules. Hell all 4 survivors can get max points without doing a single gen. It's sad how the community makes up their own rules to the game to make them selves feel righteous or whatever.
0
