If communications in DBD were balanced... why isn't it offered to solo survivors in game?
If communications in DBD were balanced... why isn't it offered to solo survivors in game?
Does anyone know the answer to this?
I should point out the wording here...
'Offered' is to offer, e.g. the survivors need not accept
'in game' is in the game, not some forum/other form of communication method
Comments
-
Leftover legacy design. This game has evolved pass the hide and seek survival party game it was released as.
3 -
Because there can't be any moderation in open voice chat. Considering the chat filter and the fact that certain extreme topics are rightfully bannable, how would they enforce that on voice between randoms? Not only that, but you'd have to balance for voice always being present, while many players would opt out of voice to not have to deal with the toxicity it can very easily cause (putting them at a disadvantage re: balancing.)
11 -
I heard about seeing everyones perks at loadout and BHVR have said that will take them 'years'... seems they don't care about developing and balancing this game for our fun which is worrying in many different ways
3 -
because like most horror games with a in built game chat. it would probably end up dying because it ruins so much of the game. The game has so many perks to cover the lack of Voice Chat for SoloQ anyways. You can't even argue they are not good perk's because some of them are extremely strong sleeper perk's. You can make build's dedicated to knowing information through the entire game.
7 -
Odd answer as moderation isn't needed in voice chat, like other games with in game communications
0 -
Oh I agree that not having communications makes the game more interesting for me but you have to think about the balance of the game as there are people out there who will use communication to play with their friends.
You can't argue to not offer communications in game because it would ruin it when people are already using communications... which do you balance the game around? If there isn't balance there is more enjoyment to those at one end and less for others which is why it is critical to balance your game
1 -
Considering this game has rules against subjects like bigotry/racism/hate speech/etc. there certainly is a need for some moderation. People get banned for things like threats and telling people to self harm in the post game chat, because the devs do not want that type of toxicity in their game.
And again, opt out excuse is pointless when it puts the player at a distinct disadvantage that is not being accounted for with balancing. Clock callouts aren't worth children screaming into their mic when getting chased/downed/missed a skill check/whatever reason. Look at how little it takes for people to give up and try to go next, you can't tell me they're going to be calm and courteous over voice.
4 -
I feel I have to repeat myself, other games who provide in game chat do not moderate their games why should DBD?
I could point out to other communication methods BHVR do currently provide that are not moderated but you seem fixated on moderation.
We live in a world where people are and aren't nice to one another, if someone in chat isn't nice you simply mute the player (for life) or not and move on.
You mention the opt out as an excuse, whilst it puts players at a disadvantage what we currently have is exactly that right now. If a player wishes to play at a disadvantage by opting out then they should be given the choice to do so, where currently solo players are forced to opt out/be at a disadvantage.
4 -
Because DBD isn't "other games." They do not want to facilitate that type of behavior, so they don't foster it.
The game isn't balanced around comms, so I don't know what youre trying to argue with the last paragraph. The game is balanced somewhere between solo and swf, but not inherently on one end or the other. The changes you propose would make the balance have to be focused on SWF, which would require a lot of changes. It would also put opt out survivors at an even bigger disadvantage.
4 -
>Because DBD isn't "other games."
What do you mean by this, this could be interpretted different ways.
>They do not want to facilitate that type of behavior, so they don't foster it.
@Ryuhi are you BHVR, what makes you think this when they actually do facilitate communications
ref:I could point out to other communication methods BHVR do currently provide that are not moderated but you seem fixated on moderation.
>The game isn't balanced around comms, ...
Again @Ryuhi are you BHBR?
Why do you think DBD isn't balanced around communications when BHVR constantly try and buff solo to SWF comms level?
Why then did DBD introduce the SWF option who will use 3rd party communications software?
DBD allow 3rd party communications software so tell me why it shoiuldn't be balanced around it?
>so I don't know what youre trying to argue with the last paragraph.
I understand you wish to avoid discussing the last paragraph
>The game is balanced somewhere between solo and swf, but not inherently on one end or the other.
Again... are you BHVR?
You cannot balance a game midway between the haves and have nots, that is impossible :)
>The changes you propose would make the balance have to be focused on SWF, which would require a lot of changes.
With the introduction of SWF these changes should already have taken place for balance but this discussion is only you telling me what you think BHVR want because I doubt you represent BHVR tbh.
>It would also put opt out survivors at an even bigger disadvantage.
You've mentioned this and I have answered this in the last paragraph you have ignored, you are failing to notice that players are already forced to opt out of in game communications.
Put simply if your arguement is that DBD should not wish to implement communciations due to you wish it be monitored unlike any other game then that is a poor argument for balancing and for the fairness of players in a computer game
1 -
I don't think it will ever happen.
No only because of the insults and hate speech (which we all know would happen), but also because of the game's nature.
DBD will always remain a hide and seek survival game, that will never change. The game is built around a certain lack of information: which is the very reason why we have perks that give the player select amounts of information, such as Alert and Bond. Also the reason why the old Object of Obsession had a risky downside to it.
It is unlikely they will ever get rid of such aspect.
4 -
The game's has a chat filter both on here and in the actual game. They have removed features in the game when they were used to target specific people (Leatherface's "face" skins) and have made very clear contributions to inclusivity (The David topic is still pinned for a reason.)
SWF was justified because survivors could lobby dodge until they got their friends. It was planned before that happened (and did happen before it was introduced,) but it made a further case for them to add the feature to the game.
"DBD allow 3rd party communications software so tell me why it shoiuldn't be balanced around it?" Because it's unenforceable, and there are people who use it not for an advantage, but just to play with their friends. Banning discord/console party communications/etc while the game is running would kill the game and they know it.
You don't need to condescendingly keep asking me if I'm BHVR. These are topics that have been discussed on these forums before, some of which we have received official responses on. Speculation is allowed to be done by an outside party, but to answer your question, no I do not work for BHVR.
Your responses are getting more frustrated/antagonistic so I'm going to stop here. Have fun in the fog.
3 -
This game encourages selfish survivors, which would be a complete mess if voice comms were basekit.
Imagine survivors screaming at lone wolf survivors, and then the lone wolf survivors claiming the other survivors are harassing them.
Voice comms only work in actual team games, which encourage people to work together.
1 -
Feel like a mute feature would come in handy. Overwatch and Warframe are 2 games I've played where you have open coms with randoms. Mute anyone who starts being toxic and you still have teammates you can talk to.
4 -
Didn't have problems with it in the original game, but Overwatch 2 got so bad that eventually I just muted everyone.
1 -
Playing comms with friends works because in the vast amount of cases they are friends.
Playing comms against strangers in a game where people happily bm during the game already and is fairly emotionally charged at times will probably not go well.
Those who do not want comms as SoloQ will also probably be singled out by those who do. Some people take things too seriously amd will get snappy.
If somebody wants comms, then they can go and make friends online. Many wish to form swf with others and do that. This forum even has a section that offers the opportunity to meet with others to form an swf.
My guess is that all these aspects have been heard by the devs and it's simply not a priority. I'm happy for that because if I want comms, I'd want it with friends, not randoms.
1 -
I was a mercy main in the original. Letting my team know I have a Tracer on my butt is key to survival.
0 -
My main was Mei.
That generates salt... sometimes from teammates, sometimes from enemies and sometimes both.
0 -
The game has "PERKS" balanced around SoloQ for information missing from lack of SwF. If you don't want to use them that's fine, but dont be arguing for something the game Dev's have stated they dont want to add years ago. The game does not need a in game chat. In fact if they wanna communicate than they can use things like Discord or PSN party Chat. Like you just said it's more interesting to have no in game communication.
I can argue against something i know that will go extremely bad. i dont wanna hear racial, sexist, and other insult's in game. It breaks the immersion of the game and overall will be more toxic than end game chat.
1 -
The day DBD allowed SWF was the day communications started making DBD a non-hide and seek survival game no matter how hard we wish it was, myself included.
4 -
@Ryuhi I feel moderation is near and dear to your heart but for reasons I keep repeating this post isn't about being able to lock everything down, the world isn't like that and people are people as are children but then this is an 18+ game.
Apologies if you are feeling frustrated/antagonistic but I am merely after an answer to my original post.
0 -
I agree, the game without comms in it's current state can create selfish survivors.
Your example of a survior screaming can be managed by muting them (lifetime setting) and the idea BHVR are still implementing of keeping previous lobby survivors ensures that you whittle away the unwanted to have a decent team thus giving a better balanced and fair game that can be fun for all
0 -
BHVR have a discord server to do what the game currently doesn't using voice comms, which kinda covers everything you said including the priority bit. Simply if the game is to be fairer and better balanced communications is the obvious step rather than trying to hide information as to who are a swf and might be using communications giving them an advantage/level playing field and who might be solo giving them an level playing field/a disadvantage
0 -
Everything you have said has been covered in previous posts.
To clarify in game chat allows everyone to have the same advantage of communications for a fairer balanced game.
Saying that DBD said that they don't want it doesn't make it true as they opened the can of worms introducing the SWF option knowing full well communications would be used and have even said it is fine to use.
0 -
The first thing I do if it ever exists is cut the audio chat.
I'm in Europe. Hearing kids screaming or ranting in any of the multiple languages around here isn't an appealing prospect.
3 -
SWF has to be allowed. It was literally added as a feature to stop people from lobby dodging until they managed to find the same lobby their friends were in.
It is in the nature of multiplayer games, it has to exist. But an in-game voice chat? Here?
I am convinced it will only cause problems.
3 -
To be fair pretty much every online game prohibits hate speech and harassment. Shoot, Steam, PlayStation, and Microsoft also prohibit these things and at least with PlayStation and Steam, they will enforce. So to say that moderation is the missing ingredient doesn’t really work as a reason why voice chat isn’t in DBD.
3 -
You'd opt-out, fair enough
18+ game however you would have it where you'd tick what languages you can speak so you'd get matched with people you could communicate with.
0 -
I have to keep saying this, it should be in the game by now but again... it is an option rather than how it is now, a forced opt out
0 -
It gets a lot more tricky when crossplay is introduced, I do not believe (correct me if I'm wrong) any of the platforms have anything they can do about platforms other than their own. Which means you would need to know which platform the offender is using and be able to report them through their process. I know microsoft's systems lets you record a clip and submit it (not sure how sony handles it logistically, but I imagine its similar) but for the most part you would need to be recording and submit a ticket to BHVR (the same way cheating has to be recorded and reported.) Online account bans are different than ingame bans and have to be handled differently, after all.
1 -
Yes that is my point. Inappropriate speech can be recorded and submitted as proof of a rule violation. It can be done.
1 -
You already got an answer. You just didn't like it.
4 -
True, but they apparently already have enough on their plate with dealing with cheats/hacks/etc, adding voice comms would require a good deal more manpower (assuming they're adequately staffed to handle their workload currently.)
0 -
Could you be any more mystifying lol?
0 -
immersion, i suppose. i'm against a voice chat, but there definitely can be more means of meaningful communication like pings or preset chats.
0 -
I don’t personally want the devs to implement voice chat. There are much better features to introduce or improve.
5 -
BHVR encourages lone wolf survivors, and allowing the mute function to affect matchmaking would go against that goal.
0 -
They balance the game off being unbalanced if that makes any sense. Just how they do MMR, if you average out the extremes it seems kind of balanced but hardly ever is match to match. In short the devs suck.
0 -
Voice chat would turn this game into an even bigger sweat fest. You would have survivors playing this game like CSGO. You get occassionally swfs now but adding voice chat would basically turn every high mmr team into a 4 man swf.
1 -
They did a poll a little bit ago asking about voice chat and a high majority of people either didn't want it or would turn it off.
1 -
Because it wouldn't help, mostly.
People pointing out the inevitable toxicity and such are completely right to do so, but they're sort of falling for the implied framing that there'd be any benefit to voice chat, which there wouldn't be. You wouldn't, as a solo survivor, be in a substantially better place from a balance perspective or an experience perspective, so there's no reliable benefit to adding voice chat to this game.
I think a lot of people expect adding voice chat to mean solo survivors will be on par with SWF, but that obviously isn't the case for a variety of reasons. It's all downsides with - at best - extremely minimal upside.
2 -
Most of what I'll say has already been covered, but I'll try and address the responses.
To start, I'll say there is a big problem with the people who say introduce voice chat and use it to balance. These people then also say that if anyone has a problem with it, they can turn it off. The issue here is if you introduce a system, lots of players turn it off/can't use it, you're still in the same place of not being any clearer on how to balance the game.
1: BHVR doesn't want the racism/sexism it would lead to. You say other companies have voice chat and they deal with the hate speech. Cool, BHVR would rather never have it happen in the first place.
2: BHVR doesn't believe that 4 person SWFs running clock call outs are common enough that they need that much attention.
3: Language issues, DbD is played worldwide and on some servers people speak different languages. Having players set a language preference would slow down matchmaking times/accuracy, which they likely view as more important.
4: It would ruin the theme of the game. The game's concept is about survivors being on their own/not knowing what's going on. That's changed over time, but it hasn't changed completely. BHVR doesn't care about creating a perfectly balanced game. They'll emphasize theme and fun over absolute balance.
5: Giving comms to a group of randoms would frequently be a mess even if everyone was trying. Comp teams have the comms down to the bare minimum to communicate messages, that wouldn't be replicated just throwing comms on for everyone. I don't want to hear someone talking about what gen they are starting and miss the sound of Ghostface nearby.
2 -
Post is about those that have it so should be offered to all for balance, to play immersive is still possible and/or to opt out.
For the reason of balance it should be offered in game
0 -
If we are truly talking about balance in the game then I'm afraid communications should be one of the highest priorities due to the imbalances it creates. I wouldn't want to be playing solo when the game is balanced around swf on communications nor killer if the game is balanced around solos without communications, in games we all want fairness and fun
0 -
By introducing the option for communications would then allow a more level playing field of fairness but the main point would be that communications is already here and the imbalance is the game is either balanced for SWFs on comms which is unfair on solo survivors or the game is balanced around solo players without comms which is unfair to killers and solo survivors. Main point being that it already is there but with restricted 3rd party comms groups
0 -
Never seen poll which is odd but if you are polling the community do you want voice chat in game then I couldn't see why a feature would be voted again. Too many variables for a poll for people e.g. a high percentage my be obtaining an unfair imbalance and why lose that.
The question is about balance and fairness not that it should be put to a poll
0 -
Many words but no substance, please give examples
0 -
Well, I'll have to assume what the expected benefit is, but sure.
The usual expectation is that voice chat will shrink the gap between SWF and solo queue, with the logic that what solo queue is missing - communication - will be granted with voice chat. This isn't the case. When you're in a SWF with someone, a live mic connection isn't the reason you can communicate; you can communicate with them because everyone in the call has the ability to use that connection, the desire to use that connection, and the language to use that connection.
Anyone who's played a game that uses voice comms in the EU region can tell you that it's quite unlikely for everyone to speak the same language in a given match. Anyone who plays in NA can tell you that not everyone has a mic, not everyone wants to use the mic, and not everyone has the disposition to use the mic in a way that doesn't suck majorly to deal with. Further, anyone who plays anywhere can tell you there are people who may try to use the mic, but have massive noise pollution wherever they live, intentionally or unintentionally.
The fact of the matter is, adding a voice chat system won't mean solo queue survivors can communicate with each other reliably. That, simply and bluntly, won't happen. If you want information to be exchanged between solo queue survivors, it has to come from other means; whether it's an active one like a message wheel, or passive ones akin to the current survivor HUD we have.
So, we're starting from the position that voice comms won't address balance concerns. From that starting point, we start adding in the unavoidable downsides like toxicity and harassment, and it becomes pretty apparent that voice comms aren't all that good of an idea for this game.
1 -
False. Well, the last part anyway.
We all do not want fairness and fun. Hence the tunneling meta. But go on about your voice comms making a WORLD of difference. Unless youre a comp team, comms will do nothing for you. And solo'Qing with randoms on comms does not equate a comp team. Or even half a comp team.
1 -
Most people don't like voice chat and the majority of people in solo queue would have it turned off, especially if it was opt-in, which it would need to be.
Solo queue would basically be the same as it is now, your teammates will still ignore information and do their own thing and usually make bad decisions and die early.
3
