General Discussions
General Discussions
Chapters and Killers
I often hear that the last two chapters were bad
The reason was that the killers were boring and uninteresting
Although the survivors in those two chapters were good with interesting perks
However, most of the community considers the two seasons to be bad
This makes me wonder: If the killer was good, would the chapter be considered good? Even if Survivor is bad designed and with boring perks?
If the killer was bad designed and boring, then this entire chapter would be considered bad, even if the survivor was the other way around?
Do the killers determine how great the chapters are?
I mean here the community
Comments
-
I think that killers are the biggest part of a chapter. They completely change the game for both survivors and killers as the survivors have to adapt to how each killers plays and what their special ability is. Survivors for the most part, are just skins with different perks. Even though a survivor can add amazing perks to the game, or mediocre ones, They don't change the way everyone plays the game like going against a different killer does. I would imagine that's why the majority of people consider some chapters good and others....not so good. Skull Merchant, for example, is widely considered boring because her ability is just "stall the game." It's not really fun for the killer OR the survivors.
Sure some survivors have introduced perks that were incredibly game changing, but that doesn't really mean people care about the survivors themselves, and I think that's the main difference.
0 -
Yes, killer is more important. For example Sadako and Dredge chapters loved mostly even Haddie was ugly and Yoichi was very forgettable survivor.
4 -
The killer has always been the meat and bones of a chapter in my opinion even in chapters where survivor stuff is amazing a ######### killer sours it
0 -
Survivors are just new skins. Killers are new powers to learn, and learn to play against. The killers are what most people judge a chapter by.
0 -
Agreed haddie sucks and dredge looks cool
1 -
A good killer is far more important than having a “good” survivor.
0 -
Imagine it was Kate level survivor instead of Haddie. I'd put that chapter to A-tier if that was case.
2 -
If its was kate zarina elodie yun jin level of survivor then yes easy A tier
2 -
There is no Haddie in Ba Sing Se and she isn't ugly.
0 -
I agree with all of them. Amazing survivors.
It's okay to have different opinion. We just have different tastes i think.
2 -
What the others said. Survivors, while cool, all play the same and bring nothing interesting to the game (perks aside). A killer, though, has its own unique style and gameplay, so original and interesting killers will always be considered more important than a survivor. My opinion, though. And of course, that doesn't mean than a survivor being awesome just makes the chapter a flop. But most likely comments will be something along the lines of 'terrible chapter, thank god we had this survivor'.
Now, if survivors were to have a unique feature, even if minimal, that made a difference in playing them, like, maybe, each survivor having a unique T4 perk slightly improving their effects, or a passive ability unique to them (nothing too big), then it would most likely be a different thing. Still not as important as a killer, but that's just the 4vs1 aspect of the game.
0 -
But what is important when it comes to the killer?
Its looks and approach to gameplay. Skull Merchant was too human-like and people usually expect a monster. Wesker et al. are exceptions due to being licensed content.
Then comes the power itself. The knight considering its approach (medieval theme) was great but not everybody likes when you hold people hostage by focusing on 3 gens only.
0
