DbD Consultant program

Interesting. Thanks for the clarification. I'm glad to hear that this has been a thing since (near) release.

This is the type of thing I'd love to be a part of personally. Here's hoping I might be one day.

Why was the decision to make it public made after all these years, out of curiosity?

The Program IS good. And it benefits the Devs and also the players. Because there are some solid people in the program (from what we know).

What might be problematic is making it public, since it might draw negative attention to people who are in it. Sure, everyone can decide for themselves if they want to be open about it, but I have already seen some communities from Streamers questioning why some people are in the program and why their favorite streamer is not in the program.

Like I agree that it's a good thing they have this program but I'm not convince it's making any difference. As we learned this program isn't new, it been around since the beginning. If this true then why did we get things like the twins rework, skull merchant, eruption, ECT? To me it's either because none of the consultants rose questions about these decisions or they did and devs just didn't listen to them. If it's the first then I question the quality of consultants they have hand picked. If it's the 2nd then I have to asked what is the point of even having this program of you not going to listen to the ppl you picked and hired.

Lastly I also agree with you about making this public. In my opinion i haven't seen anything good come from this announcement. In fact I agree alot with Spookyloopz had to say in his stream where he announced he was leaving the fog whisperer program.

On the flipside, Otz has spoken before about how much he hates that he gets the blame for perk nerfs like Scavenger and STBFL. I actually think the people who have put their hands up and said they are a consultant will come to regret it. I think it's great we know about the program but I think Hens, Tofu, Lilith, and anyone else who has said they're a part of it will eventually wish they hadn't.

Do you try and represent the different regions in the consultant team? Like Asia, South America, etc? Curious how you are getting takes from those regions were the game is played a lot differently.

I don't see the problem with this. It comes across as a playtester role, which many games already have. It makes sense overall.

At no point has there been anything saying that these people are solely consulted for changes, and Fog Whisperers and regular folk like ourselves also have avenues to give feedback that has evidence to show it was listened to. Fog Whisperers were always primarily advertisers with benefits, but their feedback also would have been considered.

In terms of feedback, if anything the only issue I have is PTBs is solely for PC. Of course I'm sure there's a logistical reason for this, but it's a shame console players aren't involved. At least changes are made after the full release, based on future feedback.

Lol, I don't see any benefits of being fog whisper nowadays. The program does nothing that benefits the streamer imo other than getting a very small number of dlc codes and a few Aura cells which most big streamers don't even need or care for. FW program imo is completely useless and does nothing anymore. Dev themselves haven't done anything for FW for over a year. When was the last time they added new ppl to the FW program? If it helped smaller streamers then sure that's amazing but most FWs are already well-known in the community and those are the ones who usually get picked for events when they happen(I don't even know the last time such an event.) From what I have seen FW only benefits BHVR bc it's free PR and advertisement for them. It does hardly anything for the streamer imo. I think dev undervalues the FW program and doesn't use it well enough. There are a lot of great ppl in the program who want to help out when comes to balance and giving feedback but is largely ignored like Otz and Spookyloopz.

So reading all this and the discussion, all I have to say is "cool". And to everything else, all I have to say is "who cares?"

I think we are just starved for content waiting for DnD that were just inventing nothingburger discussions.

Congrats to anyone who got in, and I hope you're able to make a positive influence.

It's tough to pick people that are "unbiased" as people these days tend to call everyone that disagrees with them bias. Think survivor is weaker and needs buffs? Bias. Think killer is weaker and needs buffs? Bias.

It's nearly where unless you're basically fence sitting and think things are overall pretty good where they're at you're bias. Needless to say most people misuse the word "bias" when throwing it around.

The other tough thing with picking consultants is that people have different views of what the game should be. What skill level should it be balanced around? Competitive? Party game?

Overall even though I disagree with some views that people we know are on the consultant group have about the game I still think this is overall a very good change. I just hope they get a variety of different people with different views on the game and it's not so much an echo chamber of same opinions. People with a good amount of hours in the game as well.

I'm optimistic about the consultants. This is something good for the game.

That explains it, thank you.

Fog Whisperers did get benefits in the past, but really they were just an advertising platform, even if nowadays it's not looking promising for them.

Although I cannot offer any true understanding of BHVR's recent thoughts on this programme, what I do know is one of the very first Fog Whisperers (HybridPanda) reapplied some time ago for the programme and never heard anything back. He left under personal circumstances and under no shadow, but it was odd they didn't add him back. Maybe BHVR are winding it down, because if they won't allow an original back in - who holds no baggage - it does beg the question of continuation.

I think it's fine to have biased people in the program, as long as BHVR picks a wide variety of biased people, so there is a wide variety of opinions.

Slim pickins for posts these days. This new consultation thingy changes quite literally nothing so imo there's no need for me to feel strongly opinionated.

right now there's not much to say about it.

-Bias

"prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair."

By the definition it would seem otherwise.

As that's "usually" the case, I think it would be unfair to go by exceptions rather than what is usually the case. IE putting so much emphasis on "usually" for small exceptions turns this into an argument of semantics rather than reality.

"No. I'm literally saying it's 100% fine if you get people that are 100%
trying to "unfairly" buff the survivor side, if you also get people that
are 100% trying to "unfairly" buff the killer side."

Oh well then I don't really agree with this. I don't want unfair in either direction, I just balanced and rational, unbiased ideas of people from both sides. I don't really want bad opinions on one side as long as the other side also has bad ones. That's just a weird mentality to me. It's like well it's okay if you have an OP perk as long as I get one too. Rather than neither of us get an OP perk and we work towards both sides getting balanced perks.

"For example, If a person can consistently give detailed and thoughtful
feedback about their opinions, then it's fine if they only support
survivor buffs and killer nerfs."

I guess I don't really see the use or value in detailed and thoughtful feedback unless it is also rational and balanced, and if it was in fact rational and balanced, then it's no longer biased.

On top of that Peanits even said in this thread it's been around since the game's release. Honestly, with this fact, I am pretty sure nothing major will change bc this program has been around for years and we still got things like SM and the PTB Twins rework. I bet we continue to see BHVRs poor out-of-touch decision-making years to come even with the knowledge of who is in this program.

I just focus on the most broadly used definition sources as we can find variations of definition interpretations in all directions. We’re just arguing semantics at this point and detracting from the main topic.

The definitions I’m using are the most used definitions. Finding an off definition that is not the one people typically use does not make my point invalid. My point and definition is still correct. Exceptions don’t make the rule. Your statements of what I said or implied are also exaggerating what I actually said. I’m not “demanding” anything or saying people have to use the definition “I want to use”. I am using the most broadly used definition. I didn’t pick an obscure not often used definition to fit my narrative as you’re implying. You’re making my points sound like I’m being much more aggressive than I actually am. We’re also not going to agree here so I’m trying to drop it so we don’t detract from the topic of the original post at this point.