Feeling a Lack of Innovation
Comments
-
I feel like regular, large balance updates should be part of BHVR's dev cycle. Some of the things requested in the AMA were not small issues. I don't see why it would take years to implement features already installed in DBD mobile, or a bar to show how close a Survivor is to fully healing another Survivor. Adding a grabbing symbol for survivors moving towards a hooked Survivor within a certain proximity to show someone is unhooking. Perk adjustments, etc.
BHVR claims this would take forever to implement. Are we sure it doesn't take forever because of the efforts being put towards skins and new chapters?
I think losing Otz is a huge loss and it sucks that he feels ignored by the devs and attacked by parts of the community.
0 -
I 100% agree. It still surprises me that people have as much faith as they do in BHVR. Having played many other AAA games that make changes left and right like its no big deal, I have to say the pace that DBD gets major alterations is slower than watching paint dry. Shameful really. I'll say it again as I've said for years. The 2 best things that this game has going for it are the licenses it manages to acquire (ty Mathieu) and the sheer amount of potential DBD has as an idea. That's it though.
0 -
You seem to forget that mobile doesn't need to put ressources into making new chapters like core does, they only need to port them, which means they have more time and ressources to focus on other things that bhvr doesn't have as much as for core.
Also bhvr have more than one team that works on dbd, cosmetics have their own team that only works on that, same thing with creation of new chapters or the creation of new features, one does not take away from the other.
1 -
The developers said themselves they were happy with the way Hillbilly was performing. There was never any reason for a nerf, especially not curving.
You can ask around here if you want to. The majority will agree that his nerf was not needed.
0 -
I think innovation is a great buzz word with little substance because what does it actually mean when people say it?
What exactly do you, and additionally a lot of folks who have replied with the same "they refuse to innovate" comment want from the game that would be in your view an "innovative" change?
The basic premise of DBD is still essentially unchanged as a core game and its still very popular. Its the longest running asymmetrical horror survival that I can think of, so why vastly change a good thing? Just because its been around a long time? That's not a good enough reason.
Most changes these days are simply tweaks and reworks because that's largely what things need when the base premise is still highly successful.
If they were to completely rework the game mechanics it would likely be better to launch DBD 2 than drastically rebuild the game from the ground up, but what would that even look like? Because the base premise of the game would be the same... survivors have some task to complete to escape while killer is tasked with eliminating them before that happens.
Given the sort of things people complain about on this forum, I'd say people don't want innovation. Because innovation leads to mechanics that can bend the game rules and force people to think differently and play differently. Its very clear people don't want to have to think or play differently they want the same things to work over and over for everything, they call this "balance" usually.
For example - The Nurse an "innovative" killer whom breaks a lot of the rules for "normal" chase, requires a bit of time to get good with and can be hard to play against. What's the result? One of the most complained about characters on the roster... why? Because you can't do the exactly same thing against her that you can for other killers. That's what innovation looks like.
Do you want innovation or just simplification?
4 -
You seem to be equating innovation with overpowered. They aren't the same thing.
Also, Nurse came out 7 years ago lol
Chucky has been the most innovative Killer in the past few years simply because he's small.
Things that would be innovative:
More vertacality. Underground or lower elevation spots on the map. Dynamically changing maps. Different times of day. More creativity with Killer powers. Graphics that don't look like a PS3 game. Consistently updating old Killers and perks.
6 -
I really believe that if they were to go the For Honor route things would go MUCH better.
This was a game that had SEVERAL and I mean SEVERAL issues when it came to core gameplay, to balancing, simple quality of life, etc. Starting in 2020 they cut back on A LOT of content. At first people were upset since not only did we have to wait roughly 3-4 months extra for the new season, but when we finally got the new hero she was busted as hell and made entirely of reused assets.
As time went on how ever we got more and more balance changes, several character reworks, and several quality of life changes that made the game MUCH more balanced and much more enjoyable.
These changes were gradual and took time, but nowadays the game is the healthiest its ever been and theyre slowly reintroducing the content they previously cut back on.
1 -
When people say “innovation,” they are most likely looking for designs which have noticeably drawn inspiration from sources outside Dead By Daylight’s existing formula.
Successful implementation of said innovation would be when players can look at those designs, recognize that it’s unlike anything they’ve experienced in DBD, but also feel like it belongs in the world/game.
As it stands, BHVR has been iterating on it’s existing designs for several years.
I won’t say that they haven’t been innovating, as that would be fundamentally untrue, but the overwhelming majority of updates are iterations, rather than innovations, which leads the game to feel stale.
Personally, their map designs are uninspired and are in dire need of innovation. Every map is fundamentally the same.
1 -
I’m not sure what you mean about me being aggressive when it came to the whole Billy ordeal, sorry if I came off that way, it’s difficult for me to properly convey myself online as it is hard to tell the tone of a post without literally mentioning it in the post itself. I will say that I like to express myself and that I do not appreciate it when someone else tries to impose their will onto me, but I respect people’s differing viewpoints and can make peace when and if I do not get my likes and wants met.
Also, I think that you are giving me too much credit with the Billy issue, all I did was express myself and there were plenty of people that were doing the same thing. No hard feelings, I hope.
I learned his counters and did alright against him, that still doesn’t detract from the issue of his ability having too much reward and too little drawbacks. He was and continues to be a very powerful killer, he really doesn’t need to be able to essentially spam his ability like he used to be able to do. One hit is all it takes to down a survivor that is at full health, on top of this, he travels very quickly while using his ability. Those things are very powerful and no killer should be able to spam that, counters notwithstanding.
No worries!
I think that he needed to have more of a drawback for using his powerful ability, I remember when he was being debated about quite passionately on the forums in those days, and one of the things that was brought up in defense of Billy was that he already had the little animation that would play at the end of using his ability, and that this animation essentially served as a cool down already. I mean…. really? After reading that I had a good laugh and was left with the impression that the side that was defending Billy’s original condition were grasping at all the straws, trying to make monument of Billy out of said straws.
2 -
Kinda weird given that curveable loops added more depth of "is the billy gonna go wide or hug it tight". It removed the whole just hold w and drop pallet when you know you can't get another rotation.
1 -
In my experience, Billy is literally just spam rev chainsaw around every loop, survivor either predrops or billy downs them with a curve, rinse and repeat.
I never saw it as adding more depth, if anything i'd call it boring and one dimensional, same reason why i hate engraving billies.
0 -
1) Developers are allowed to change their minds over time.
2) The majority won't agree, as the majority won't even comment on this. Instead, we'll get Billy's fanclub rushing in to tell us the nerfs were unnecessary. Most people don't rush in to comment about Billy, because they're happy that Billy is garbage when most people play him.
3) Billy's curving was a problem with the maps back then. It was nerfed for a reason. It was nerfed for the same reason that Blight's large angle flicks were nerfed, and the same reason why Chucky's large angle flicks were nerfed. It just created way too many situations where the M2 power was a free hit.
2 -
Honestly, couldnt agree more.
I played 5 games today after a 3 month break hoping to feel a bit of passion, motive and enthusiam but am met with nothing but dissapointment to be honest.
3 out of 5 games were obvious hackers, teleporting across map, insta downing you then teleporting you to hook.
The other 2, I got camped. Did the anti camp mechanic do any justice? No. Its so god damn slow and by time you get to unhook, you are either going to get tunnelled anyway or you dont make very much progress in the match.
After these 5, I just shut down the game and don't even intend on playing unless its with friends now.
I know what I mentioned are just small things compared to everything else but why should people have to put up with this whilst Behaviour are having the time of their lives making money and releasing chapters and skins.
I have yet to play killer this month, and I am sure I will have mt quarrels with that too, but safe to say, I probaly wont even open the game till the New Year now. I dont even care about the Winter Event or Daily Rewards because whats the point of playing if you cant even play the game properly.
0 -
1-) Not if they say it on the day they nerfed him, which was exactly what happened.
2-) You can test it yourself. Just make a thread. I still think most people won't agree with Billy's nerf.
3-) That is just your opinion. And if I may share mine, I had no problems with curving Billys whatsoever. That doesn't mean I never lost to one of them, of course not, but if they got me it was fair.
0 -
Ehh those are some bad survivors then. People were dodging curves all the way back when he was getting popular but I guess years of rarely anyone playing him and suddenly people don't know counterplay.
2 -
I mean, i know how to counter billy, i just don't find it as fun or interactive as the people claim it is.
0 -
Whether a change is overpowered can be completely independent of whether or not its innovative, I didn't equate them I gave an example of innovative design and you answered in the exact manner I stated the community does in my example, with a complaint about it being overpowered.
A lot for the complaints about killers who switch up mechanics are typically that they have no "counterplay" and when you read between the lines "counterplay" means "can't be looped like other killers." So whether or not something is overpowered is independent of whether its innovative. Don't confuse the point.
Nurse was an example of innovative design and how poorly it can be received by this community, and your immediate "overpowered" reply demonstrates my point perfectly. I'm well aware of her age and it doesn't change the nature of her design. With respect to that I ask again... "do you want innovation or simplification?"
As for your examples of "innovative changes"
- We have one daytime map, we have multi-level maps, I'm always up for more variety but neither of these suggestion are innovative they are just asking for more currently existing stuff.
- We have some dynamically changing maps, the Game and Hawkins get more accessible as completed generators open doors, more things like this would be good. Again no specifics provided with what you mean by innovative dynamic changes.
- Creativity with killer powers - The Nurse example leads to people calling them overpowered and hence forth is a great example of wanting simplification not innovation so I don't think you are genuinely calling for innovative powers if you immediately go to "overpowered" as the counter point for an example of innovative design... but I've already covered this above.
- Better graphics is hardly innovative, its just an update, but there has already been graphics and animation updates.
- Consistently updating killer perks is a request for timeline changes not really innovative change, its more of a scheduling suggestion.
So again, innovation makes for a great buzzword, but if your examples of innovation are actually supplicative and your response to a genuine example of innovative design is "well that's overpowered", then the original question still stands unanswered.
"What exactly do you, and additionally a lot of folks who have replied with the same "they refuse to innovate" comment, want from the game that would be in your view an "innovative" change?"
2 -
For me it's less a lack of innovation and more them being OK with leaving garbage in their game for years.
As such the thing that really got me was the dismissive attitude towards the general perks being terrible. That "New killers don't need regression" bit is baloney. New survivors start with 3/4 different and good options for exhaustion perks. Are they just expecting every new killer to rush getting Clown or Artist, shell out for Demo, or get lucky with the terrible Shrine of Secrets or something? Because I can tell you right now that they won't. Their first few shard purchases will go towards whichever killer seems most cool, fun, or interesting. Not which one actually gives them borderline necessary perks for later.
When I started, I got kind of lucky that Thana was decent at the time and I was most interested in Legion who can use it incredibly well. If I hadn't been in that boat, I probably would have quit before I got very deep into things since I wasn't interested in Clown or Hag and Artist didn't exist yet.
1 -
"What exactly do you, and additionally a lot of folks who have replied with the same "they refuse to innovate" comment, want from the game that would be in your view an "innovative" change?"
My point in the thread was a bit different than everyone else's, because my primary concern is the way content was handled, instead of asking for more innovations.
Does that fit your line of questioning?
1 -
You keep giving me examples of maps and Killer that came out in a previous decade.
I think that says everything people need to know.
0 -
You raise a good point here. I mean mechanically DBD is pretty simple.
At most you are going to get different environments, themes or layouts or tweaks of current design. There is not a lot else to be done.
When they bring in changes that stray to far from the mould they tend to result in unfamiliar components that people complain about.
A lot of DBD is doing the same thing with very slight variations, when something appears that breaks the rules people tend to complain that the same thing doesn't work rather than try and switch things up.
Its all good to call for innovation but really what people are asking for is simplification.
If people want to have the same kinds of chase mechanics be reflected by every killer and survivor interaction, how then can you really have anything truly groundbreaking or innovative?
Its the double edged sword of trying to introduce new things into the strict ruleset you've applied to your setting. If there is a strong belief that there is only one right way to play DBD, which there really is for a lot of players, then how can anything be a new experience yet still feel like it fits?
DBD has been around so long now that its probably less likely to get big change ups, rather incremental tweaks to existing design.
3 -
Perfectly.
You gave a good example of this in your point about killer design.
"Killer design is getting less and less creative, usually a repetition of anti-loop killers that you can only counter by holding W and pre-dropping pallets, while the older killers suffer with unnecessary changes."
How do you change things if the player base lament change while at the same time call for innovation.
You could say that DBD doesn't really need any big shakeups as its a pretty tried and true formula. Though that does lead to designs that need to fit into the tried and true formula. Because when it doesn't, its often remarkably unpopular or at least one group really enjoy it and the other endlessly complain about it.
There should be chase killers, stealth killers, gen defense killers, hook defense killers and BHVR try but the community response is always everything sucks but chases... make chases! Well you get what you ask for.
How do you get an innovatively different thing that works exactly the same as the thing that came before it? Because that's what being asked for and its nonsense.
3 -
Oh please, I gave examples of designs that are the same as what you gave. You want more examples of stuff we already have and you want it on a shorter time line and that's fine but it has nothing to do with innovation.
You posted a rant and when someone asked you define what you meant by innovation you couldn't provide an answer.
Look at the 3 key points from your OP.
- "One is BHVR's glacial change schedule." I want stuff faster too and DBD is slow to change but what does that have to do with lacking innovation as you put it? Its clear you don't like the changes but again the innovation part is just a buzz term to frame your personal frustration.
- "Two is BHVR's apparent lack of understanding of their own game." Oh the hubris, I guess you know better than the developers what they want from their own game.
- The last point is the only one even mildly related to your rationale for the topic, the lifespan of DBD like all things that have been around a long time can lead to some stagnation in design. I addressed this because if integrating dynamic changes results in unpopular or even exploitable mechanics then keeping to a tighter more standard design is the inevitable outcome.
So its likely that DBD isn't going to change a whole heap given the rigid and simplistic play experience that players seem to want from it. Its a bummer but hey its still a good game overall.
So yeah you're disappointed sure, but the last bit really sums up the lack of focus in the whole point. "That's not a shot at BHVR, just an opinion." I'll criticize it but then I'll back peddle and try not to be a bad guy by saying "I'm not having a go its just an opinion," talk about a disingenuous conclusion.
If you can't answer the question that's fine. But I have some conclusions of my own - I think you're not here for an answer, or a discussion, but simply to complain and have people commiserate with you.
3 -
I see.
Interesting points here, mate. I'll see what I can respond.
How do you change things if the player base lament change while at the same time call for innovation.
You don't, thats the thing. Just because something can be changed, doesn't mean it should. I have a really long list of things I think shouldn't have changed in DBD. The demands for innovation can be answered by the newer content, because they are the root of the problem. Killer design getting less creative, as I've said.
You could say that DBD doesn't really need any big shakeups as its a pretty tried and true formula. Though that does lead to designs that need to fit into the tried and true formula. Because when it doesn't, its often remarkably unpopular or at least one group really enjoy it and the other endlessly complain about it.
I'd say DBD had a tried and true formula, an excellent one, but it was treated poorly.
There should be chase killers, stealth killers, gen defense killers, hook defense killers and BHVR try but the community response is always everything sucks but chases... make chases! Well you get what you ask for.
Here I'll demand bragging rights for being someone who doesn't complain about everything except chases. I like killer variety, I really do. And it is there, but again, you see it more with older content than the new one.
Chase killer - Hillbilly
Stealth killer - Myers
Gen defense - Old Doctor
Hook defense - Leatherface
But then you get to the new additions: Chucky, Skull Merchant, Xenomorph, Artist... endless cycle of pre-dropping pallets and holding W. Sadako is a rare exception, which explains how happy people were when she released without an anti-loop power. But, as you've pointed out, there are complaints.
How do you get an innovatively different thing that works exactly the same as the thing that came before it? Because that's what being asked for and its nonsense.
You try to please as many players as you can. You keep the chasing killers viable, while also keeping that variety in. It isn't easy, but it can be done.
0 -
I'll respond when I have access to a real keyboard but I threw in that last line to prevent the post from being taken down.
Sometimes, people take things too personal when it isn't mean to be.
0 -
DBD's schedule being slow means that Killers that could have good reworks and could stop being boring to play as (Freddy, Twins, Myers etc etc) apparently never get their reworks. Freddy's Dream World has a whole PLETHORA of things that could be unique and boundary pushing. You could pull gens into the Dream World, the Dream World could change the lay-out of the map, DW could affect the real world etc etc.
There's really no excuse for things to take as long as they do. It was fine when we had 12 Killers, but we've got well over 30 now.
You might also say, "Well, you can't expect quality if you rush it." That's true, except most of BHVR's true reworks have been bad. Especially recently. Trickster isn't really much better and that change took years. Sadako is getting ANOTHER rework because hers failed so badly. If you're going to make consistently bad changes, do it quickly so that we can get to a winning rework faster.
I do, evidently and so do others. Nobody gets it right all the time, I thought Hyperfocus was going to be a huge issue, but it hasn't been. However, I'm sure certain people take great pleasure in being right about MFT. Heck, the Trickster changes or Boil Over. Almost everybody immediately pointed out how horrible those changes were and yet BHVR still dedicated, what, months to them? Solo Q and new player experience? Pshh, maybe someday? What kind of answer is that??? I think everyone and their mother understands that both of those experiences are uniquely bad and I highly doubt you'll argue that.
It's less DBD's lifespan and more it's success, although they've certainly contributed to each other; I highly doubt DBD would be around today if it hadn't have been a successful game. There's no competing games, no challengers and it seems to be making an extraordinary amount of money, so why change anything? Why innovate? I get it. But that breeds stagnation and lazy design, which like I said, leads to a slow death.
Innovation's definition, I believe, depends greatly on you ask. For me, it's about inspired design. Sometimes that means being faithful to the source material, sometimes that means expanding on it. It means taking risks, maybe they don't work or maybe they do. It means exploring new gameplay features and mechanics. Always keeping a mind out for how the game can be improved. Always striving to be better and to push the limits of what your playerbase thought possible.
I remember the feeling of seeing the Endgame Collapse being revealed. We were all so excited, it was a brand-new feature after three years. It addressed a need and it added a new and intense feature to the game. We couldn't wait to see what they were planning next! Maybe the maps would change during the match? Maybe there would be an Early-Game Collapse? Who knew!
In the end, maybe I should've been more (or less) confrontational. Stick to one, you know? I don't ever really plan out my posts, I write off the cuff, so to speak. Ultimately, I felt it important and I really didn't want anyone at BHVR to take it personally, but I still felt it needed to be said.
3 -
- Couldn't agree more, just because it can be changed doesn't mean it should be. I wasn't saying it needed changing just the OP was about the failure of BHVR to be innovative but do they really need to be to make good changes? or do some things even need to change, for a lot no they don't. I've liked a lot of the new DLC but there is a bit of a "samey" feel to the killers when it comes to how they interact with survivors, but then everyone hated 3-gen SM so what can you do?
- Yeah there are definitely some things that I'm not a fan of and just plain don't understand but I wouldn't say the game is treated poorly. I mean there are still new DLC and ongoing updates even after all this time so BHVR are committed to the game.
- Brag away - there is more to this game than chases
- Sometimes it best not to try and please everybody because typically when you try to please everybody you end up pleasing nobody.
I do think there is an over focus on chase mechanics, but every other style of play is (to some extent unnecessarily so) lamented about. Inevitably the player base gets what it asked for... the same chases over and over.
3 -
I know it's not as simple as hiring more devs, but they really need to find a way to speed things up. I wish quality of life and balance updates could take priority over DLC/cosmetics, but they are a business after all.
I love this game, but I do think it still has a lot of untapped potential.
1 -
1 -
Now this is a discussion.
You make a very good point about Freddy and that would definitely be a big shake up for some interesting changes, but you are talking big rework there that has to also interact with the plethora of perks. Not that I wouldn't want to see it. I think more realistic changes would be kinda like Myers, where there are a few different versions of him depending on what addons are being run rather than big mechanics overhauls these days. I wish more killers worked that way.
I think its more likely that 30 killers and 240 something perks will only slow the timetable down. It was far more reasonable to expect rapid change with 12 killers but at this point a killer's power has to interact with all 240+ perks. I'm not making excuses for BHVR's slow timetable, just willing to accept its probably not gonna move at the extent I want it to either.
I'm always cautious with ideas like "boring" etc as reasons for change, because its so subjective to quantify whether something is boring. That's what player satisfaction surveys are for. But if the majority are doing as I hypothesize, which is just bemoan anything that differs to far from the mould, all we are going to get is what fits in the mould and that kills innovation more so than prolonged lifespan.
I get what you mean about MFT etc but conceptually MFT and perks like it are a simple change to attenuate the mechanic, bolstering solo que with more information has much wider impact on the game and I'm sure how to do it properly is a much more blue sky debate with differing opinions.
I wouldn't argue with you about the answers being lackluster for future roadmaps but they were really only lackluster with respect to higher concept changes like "how do we improve solo player experience". That really isn't directly comparable to the more simple "is MFT haste too fast?" I personally don't think a lot of the proposals for solo queue are very good, in fact I can see a lot more negatives associated with them than positives usually.
Knowing perk load out for one, the elitist nature of online gaming would have people denigrating each other and lobby dodging over loadouts long before it lead to any QOL improvements and the new UI is already ugly and cluttered. So I don't blame them for being non-committal and dragging their feet on that one.
I agree that DBD risks becoming a victim of its own success, in fact it has already to some extent, given the rather "samey" nature of more recent releases. Although chucky is a lot of fun so its not all bad and I don't think its the doom herald just yet.
Well its a forum so the best way to ensure even disparaging assessments aren't taken down is to be constructive at the very least.
2 -
This game is balanced around lack of information for both sides. And SWF breaks that significantly.I know I'm bumping back a couple of posts in the discussion, but I wanted to add on to this.
When we look at some of the innovative changes that have happened in the past (i.e. Nurse) people generally didn't like them.
People like the gameplay loop. Changes to that are met with hostility. Look at the proposed auto-pickup mechanic.
That's why I think they are spending their time on smaller scale changes, like the anti-face camp mechanic (which I think they did an excellent job with). If people like the general gameplay, don't radically change it, just try and address the issues that exist within that loop without breaking it.
Knowing perk load out for one, the elitist nature of online gaming would have people denigrating each other and lobby dodging over loadouts long before it lead to any QOL improvements and the new UI is already ugly and cluttered. So I don't blame them for being non-committal and dragging their feet on that one.So that's a really good point and one I hadn't thought of for why not to display perk loadouts. I could see people dodging adepts, new players, meme loadouts, etc.
The one possible exception, is that it doesn't just have to be a hypothetical discussion. It already exists in DbD mobile - what happens in that game and is there any reason to think people would treat the core game differently (maybe they are different, I don't play any type of mobile game but I could see an argument that its a different player base in how they act).
1 -
DBD’s simplicity is inherently why it has been so successful.
Conceptually, it is very easy to grasp. Mechanically, it has a low barrier for entry.
In that respect, there is absolutely nothing wrong with DBD’s simplicity.
I think I’ve seen you mention chess on here once before. It is curious to note chess’ popularity, given it’s age, it’s simplicity, and it’s “lack of innovation.”
It seems there is something to be said about games as a service, and the expectations that follow.
“Innovation” and “Simplicity” don’t need to be mutually exclusive. A good design can be both.
….and now I’ve lost my train of thought. Sorry, lol, I don’t know what happened but my mind has gone completely blank while writing this. I’m certain I was building towards a coherent thought, so I’ll send this through.
I do apologize if this reply turns out to be nonsensical jargon. 😅😭
0 -
Definitely a nitpick but DBD is only easy to grasp if it's explained to you properly....which the game does not do a very good job of.
2 -
I agree you with you simplicity is important when it comes to an asymmetrical game especially.
DBD formula is the only one that has worked to the point where Identity V asked for permission to copy mechanics.
Asymmetrical design is fragile so i can understand why the devs want to be careful about making changes to the gameplay. If they change up the forumla too much it could become like the other asymmetrical games... dead.
@ Topic
I do think the video is reasonable though.
But i just can't blame the devs so much for their responses. The responses are disappointing but that's how it has to be sometimes with developer to player communication. They can't lie and silence is even more frustrating.
Unfortunately though it seems like this video has sent a lot of players into a rage with the game. People declaring that they quit, that otzdarva quits and that the devs don't care about anything and only what makes them money.
Otzdarva never communicated these things this is just how some people seem to have interpreted the video. I think people are getting too irrational about it.
He just said he is going to stop making the videos where he complains about particular issues and the suggestion videos because they don't lead to anything. Also winstreaks because of MMR and cheaters (and honestly i don't think winstreaks should be possible anyways)
I do admit it is disappointing that devs don't seem to directly implement suggestions that everyone likes. But i have to understand that the devs have a different picture and understanding of the game and they probably know best.
So my overall thoughts are that i think otzdarva's video is reasonable but i think the interpretation that the game needs some sort of revolution is irrational and i don't agree with it.
3 -
No viable competition = no need to innovate. Then you also have all the loud angry people who are miserable with the game, yet still dump hundreds of dollars in for cosmetics.
Stop rewarding mediocrity.
0 -
I got the gist.
I don't mean to imply that innovation and simplicity are mutually exclusive, just that players seem to really despise anything truly different in this game and while bemoaning that they also call for innovation. When you look at what they are asking for its, easier tutorials, more information, less dynamic play and similar game structure and outcomes.
Its very clear that innovation is not the community desire but simplification is. The irony of complaining that BHVR is "failing to innovate" while at the same time repeatedly bemoaning anything that is different, interesting or deviating from the most pedestrian DBD experiences is palpable.
Just makes me chuckle is all.
0 -
Maybe, in addition to the aforementioned concern, I just enjoy some of the unknown elements of this game.
You aren't a coordinated team with combat training, you are a bunch of random victims in a nightmare world. The survivor play experience should reflect that and it still kinda does even with some folk's ongoing effort to undermine that premise in the name of competitive balance.
Again often when people say balance they mean simplification.
3 -
What is your view on the way chase vs hiding has evolved over the lifespan of the game? Are you satisfied with both aspects as they exist today?
0 -
Yes and no, but neither has evolved very much. Aside from looping most things affecting chase/hiding have been external to the actual chase mechanics, map layout/size, killer power, more aura reading etc.
Looping was inevitable as player's squeezed every ounce out of the mechanics. But playing around a structure like an L-T wall is very different from circling around the same rock with a pallet 4 times. The latter is more common unfortunately and far more uninteresting.
Some things I think would improve atmosphere and gameplay
- More LOS blockers to play around, mind games mean less and less lately as you can see over most stuff. Especially the killer shack with all the holes in it. Walls should actually block red stain. When you can see red stain through the wall mind gaming, the most fun part of chases, is rendered mute.
- Heavier fog that actually had a silhouette effect at long distance
- More dynamic shading, flickering lights, fog lamp effect, map palettes can be a lil flat either overly dark or bright, perhaps maps that start in twilight and get progressively darker.
The game should be an intense game of cat and mouse, where avoiding the killer is just as big a part of the game as getting into chases. Greater emphasis of awarding Pips and BP's for successful stealthy play not just escapes from chases.
Killer should be immediately threatening in chase before you even take player "skill" into consideration, thus making avoiding the killer paramount and chases high stakes and meaningful.
A lot of the guesswork has been removed in the name of balance but that took a lot of the thrill out of the game.
For example... I remember trying to play around Spirit's unknown phasing mind game. Is she using her power or isn't she??? You had to guess and sometimes you guessed wrong and that was thrilling. But the "it has no counter play!" whiners got her and now there is a big flag telegraphing if she's using her power that takes all guesswork and prediction out of the equation. Meaning like everything else the go to is run around the same rock 4 times.
Like I said simplification the death of true game intensity. The game has evolved somewhat but in a direction that tends to make it blander rather than more thrilling.
2 -
I agree with your points. I find it much more thrilling as Killer when Survivors play line of sight and as the Killer I am constantly guessing which direction they went. Sometimes I guess wrong and they are able to use that small window to hide. I imagine those moments must be heart-pounding for them too.
As far as fog and dynamic lighting, I love that stuff. I am all for it. I am a horror fan first and foremost. And to be quite honest I do not get the impression that Survivors get thrilled as much as they should against the Killer. I understand the “scariness” will wear off after a while but the thrill of chase/hiding and being found are primally embedded into our psyches. It’s this aspect that I wish was more heavily leaned into; I mean the foundations are clearly there.
Thank you for indulging my inquisitiveness.
1
