an interesting set of questions i just thought about
i was scrolling through the forums today and saw that the general topic of "balance" seems to be the one big thing that's usually discussed whenever i log in, and it got me thinking about the state of the game and how the developers have been slowly gravitating towards the point of achieving a neutral point for both sides. this had me wondering; what would happen if dead by daylight actually managed to achieve a good level of balance? could an asymmetrical game ever become TOO balanced or overbalanced?
think of it this way: if we reached a state of the game where both sides had equal advantage over each other either through add-ons, perks, or map design, would there still be a challenge? would the gameplay become stale and would there be no incentive to get better as a result? what about individual player skill level? how difficult would it be to become really good at the game, if everyone else was able to achieve the same position as you? how would you personally try to make the game more interesting for yourself if everything managed to reach an equal state of being and it stayed that way for a long while?
a lot of the things that add a layer of difficulty or detail to the game seem to be placed on the chopping block more often than negotiated and i think it raises an interesting discussion point, given the fact that everyone's idea of 'balance' seems to be different from each other. it's almost like the sort of discussion on what life would truly be like if it was all a utopia and how it would still have downsides.
lets discuss! i'm really curious on what people have to say
Comments
-
Well player skill has to account for something. I wouldn't imagine a 100 hour killer or survivor would have the same results as a 1000 hour killer or survivor. A perfect balance seems to me to be a situation where everyone has an equal opportunity of achieving the same thing. I don't think that's possible in this game.
3 -
Hello Skittles,
My take on this topic is that most people fail to grasp what balancing actually is and what it means for a game. In truth, the best method of balancing for a PVP game is to balance through imbalance.
People don't realize that if this game was truly balanced it would die quickly because it would be boring.
The Gen-Kick meta was actually quite balanced in my opinion, which makes it a perfect example because it was miserable and got totally deleted.
Killers finally had a very strong answer to the fact that gen progression items and builds were extremely strong, borderline unbalanced, and thus the game was a balanced tug-of-war. But who enjoyed it? DBD was never meant to be played in 10-20 minute sessions of chipping away at your objective. Its supposed to be fast-paced intense gameplay from start to finish, in order to achieve that, there has to be things that heavily sway the tide of a match.
Having high-high's and low-low's is what makes the game so addicting in my opinion and contributes to its current success.
1 -
Perfect balance isn’t really achievable in an asymmetrical. That said, it could still be significantly better.
1 -
your viewpoint is in-line with mine. pretty much everything you've said is what i would've said to another person!
i agree, the act of balancing would be very hard to achieve given that this is an asymmetrical game. and honestly, i think that's what makes dead by daylight so interesting. because it's so unbalanced, anything can happen and it keeps it fresh!
0 -
I don't think any game that wants to be successful and stay relevant is interested in balancing perfectly. People will get bored because the most optimal and efficient ways are discovered very fast, so people would have to play a certain way to get a 4k/escape. That's why you see many other games nerf and buff stuff. It's not because they're trying to achieve some sort of perfect balance, if anything they're trying to make people go out of their comfort zone and adapt.
And no I don't think everyone would be able to play on the same level, because the game keeps changing. Even if the game stayed the same and only new killers/survivors got added they'd still significantly impact the balance of the game, DBD is not able to stay static because it is still supported and developed. Plus not all meta's fit all people, that's why you have so many posts here complaining they can't win anymore, because they cannot adapt. Maybe the current meta does not speak to them, maybe they are stuck in their old ways and cannot give up their old habits. The sign of a good player is usually also adaptability.
0 -
Here's the thing an interactive game is better than a balanced one
Look at Friday the 13th the game isint totally balanced
Jason could pres 2 buttons and your match is over but people loved the game all the little thing you could do to survive
blocking doors
Scavageing for gear
Hiding is a strat
Running is a strat
You can combat Jason even kill Jason
You can hurt yourself to survive longer
If it wasn't for the lawsuit the game would still be strong
Now look at evolved it is a perfect balanced game play a monster evolve stages of growth
But it turns into a run lv up occasionally fight to wait out dome run lv up till max lv
Fight kill 1 or 2 heal up kill again there's not much interaction so it didn't last long
0
