"You can't force people to play the game" When did this become so popular of a saying?
Comments
-
More suicides began once they announced bots. Strange that.
So half the time you won't even get a bot that would have been more productive anyway than a great deal of players are.
0 -
If you have a bad connection, yes. You're playing a Multiplayer game with a bad ping/connection and YOU'RE the ONE to ask this question?
Yeah how dare people want teammates with stable internet and not dial-up/wifi connections. The nerve.
7 -
No. I do not want it to be centred around that. I'm just saying we got bot survivors so is there really any point to having this? People are gonna give up on hook to dodge the penalty, making bots unable to be used therefore making the change useless. I'll quit preaching the idea once killer bots are a thing in custom. Not just the tutorial. I love this game with all my heart.
0 -
Ooooookay
0 -
It certainly is okay in some situations. If my "team" never so much as looks in the direction of a gen in the first 5 minutes and is instead off trading hooks and trying (i.e. failing) for flashlight saves I see nothing wrong with bowing out. If they aren't going to put in some effort to progress the match, I'm under no obligation to stick around and help them lose slower. Making moral absolutist statements about a mostly gray situation is pretty silly. There are situations where they're obviously wrong, like going down 20 seconds in and trying to suicide immediately. However, in my experience that's fairly rare. I actually see DC's more often, oddly enough. I guess if they're "that type" they're more likely to take the quick twitch reaction of hitting "Leave Game" than wait until they're on hook to decide.
P.S. Apparently censored posts get uncensored in the reply box when you quote them. Weird.
0 -
So we again are faced with 3 options:
1) Ban people for hook suicide and multiple DCs which over time will lead to a smaller and smaller playerbase and longer cues and more frustration.
2) Keep DC penalties where they are and continue to deal with hook opt outs to avoid penalties.
3) Remove DC penalties and no match will finish without multiple bots.
Or... do something to fix why people DC. Better MMR which will mean longer cue times but games will be more balanced. Remove tunneling and camping. Drop the ability to stack gen repair speed perks and items.
Short of fixing the greater cause of why people leave a match (I don't see it as "entitlement", I see it as customers saying this isn't fun) there isn't much else to do that doesn't create more problems.
2 -
fair enough. If the team look completely hopeless and your 5nins in i could understand that a bit more.
0 -
The thing is that the game is so big with so many different things .... and four out of five people have not the slightest clue what they will go up against. Chances are that, if you don't love every single killer, every single strategy and every single type of character you come accross ... there will be matches that you absolutely hate because of things outside of your control (aka who and what you get matched against)
0 -
Most of the games I play you can leave without penalty unless it is a ranked game mode.
2 -
This argument is bad. Because, yes, yes you can force them. By banning them if they do it. Pretty simple, and will end this entitled behavior very quickly. Most other games already do this.
6 -
"you can't force someone to play a video game"
Yes true but also nobody made them log in either, they made choices and then decided they didn't like the consequences. ######### is goofy af.
3 -
I'm serious, I can't get the event challenges done because of being constantly booted and the penalty punishing me for being poor I'm actually having a ######### mental breakdown. I just want the last piece of this stupid jake cosmetic.
0 -
Exactly.
I work from home, but also have a 8 month old son. He plays next to me while I work, and I'm there for him the second he needs something. If he wakes up in the middle of the match crying because he is hungry, do you think I'm just going to let him scream until the game is over? Nope. I'm immediately getting up and making him a bottle. It doesn't matter if I'm playing Survivor or Killer.
If you want there to be an AFK timer and then the player is hit / gets a DC penalty, i get that. Flat out asking for a ban? That's nonsense. Even in games with ranked mode (such as Overwatch), you would lose 50 SR and get a 5 minute ban from Competitive Matchmaking.
3 -
If DBD was a party game, then yes feel free to DC since bots will fill the slot. However BHVR in their quest to pander to everyone for the largest share of the pie doesn’t want to define what DBD is supposed to be.
Adding bots without doing more about DCs/suicides is what a party game would be like because not much is at stake.
But when you have BHVR also endorsing DBD as a competitive game via community cups, they send a lot of mixed signals.
This results in everyone applying their idea of what DBD is supposed to be into their logic and arguing around it.
You have some people arguing, “Think of the casuals. Friends shouldn’t be punished playing together. The amount of people playing competitively in public games is a very small percentage. ”
On the other hand, there are people maintaining that people who DC or suicide should be punished because they offer a disadvantage to the team even if bots exist. Both roles should be balanced based on the top 5%, win conditions etc
Lots of discussions would go a lot smoother if there was a clear idea of what DBD is supposed to be. If DBD was a casual game, then SBMM could be removed, AI directors could be implemented to make games not feel one sided. If DBD was competitive, ingame comms could be added, the game could be balanced around Survivors and Killer instead of Swf, Killer and solo queue.
Even the sentence “You can’t force people to play” makes sense if DBD was a party game where winning or losing didn’t matter that much. From a competitive perspective though, it makes no sense, hence here we are now with no real conclusion.
0 -
The punishment system involving this will either be too harsh or too light. It's very difficult to strike up a happy medium without some trial and error first.
How do you tell the difference between unhook attempt escapes to give hatch, or to leave the game, or for a new player who knows no better? What if someone has an emergency, but because they've DCd before due to similar situations they come back to an account ban? Or if you have spotty Internet for a day, and when it comes back you find you've got a ban for dcing. What happens when people figure out the max amount you can dc within a timeframe and do it anyway up to a point?
This is why I say that these people should be taken into account when designing game systems (a la dc bots). Instead of investing time, money, and resources into a system that will either not ban enough or unfairly ban legitimate players, it's better to invest that time and money into other aspects of the game to ensure the other 4 players are screwed over as little as possible.
Unfortunately, sometimes you have to cater to them in creating something, because the opportunity cost of doing otherwise is too great.
1 -
I'd actually argue that the "hook 4% mechanic" should just be removed entirely. But obviously such a system wouldn't just look at a single time this happens just like, any other game that literally exists. It would be based on a pattern of behavior that shows that you do this consistently. If you are afking, or getting <2k bloodpoints for multiple matches, obviously something is going wrong. Even the worst players shouldn't seem like they are afk multiple games in a row.
Additionally, you can obviously tweak such a system to take into account whether someone is new, and potentially give them more leeway.
0 -
"Other people have real life responsibilities"
Yes and as I have said if it comes up enough to actually be punished for it you shouldn't be playing sorry. Especially with how short of games dbd has.
Also I said consistent behavior, you mentioned things that don't happen often unless intentional.
Luck build would obviously not impact things if self unhook was removed outside of deli.
I don't have an emotion strong enough on this subject to actually call it hatred, just distain. That being said it's all about the survivor experience. When someone dcs or gives up in my killer lobbies I am far more frustrated for the other survivors they left behind not my own experience and when I play survivor they ruined the game for me entirely.
Again people giving up, leaving or trolling only leads to more doing the same out of tilt. Letting people run wild like you want, even more so than is currently allowed will only hurt the game more.
I don't think I reclarified this either, I said this penalty system wouldn't go into place until a certain hour threshold was hit. At a 100 hours you know not to kobe or the other things discussed. I'm doing nothing but a cycle hurting the player base directly.
0
