http://dbd.game/killswitch
Does anyone think Otzdarva helps the game yes or no and why?
Comments
-
I think content creators help the game in many ways and that every single person on earth is capable of coming up with their own opinions on things based on the things they see, hear, and experience. We are not doing content creator whataboutism on the FEEDBACK forum.
10 -
I would say yes, his content is mostly positive and he gave us tons of guide videos, which I would say made many players improve in DBD overall.
5 -
Despite the fact that I disagree with many of his opinions, yes, he helps game a lot.
5 -
The only thing I don't like that he does is get down into the super-OCD, nitty-gritty mentality of "Oh no, you spent 0.2 seconds doing this one thing that could've been spent working on a generator!" He carries a meta approach to the game instead of innovative, creative, or abnormal thoughts - and, as said above - people take his word as gospel truth as if he is the top authoritative voice.
That said, I do enjoy his content - it's not that the above is inherently and absolutely wrong.
-3 -
Yes he does. If you want to play at the best level he helps with that.
0 -
Not lately no, I was watching his stream 2 days ago he still thinks global killrate is at 50%, he uses nightlight stats with sample size of 100 games to justify killers needing more global buffs, we also know abandon count as escape on this site…
that's the kind of people bhvr listens to when balancing the game, plays 95% killer and does killer winstreaks for a living, obviously totally disconnected from the average survivor's experience
-6 -
His opinions should be taken into consideration.. and that would have been especially helpful during that failed livestream they just attempted. But what he says should not be the end all be all. They need more perspective from other killer mains, and survivor mains. Or people who just play the game in balance even. Would be nice.
1 -
Except there have been numerous cases where he has advocated for nerfs for a number of killer perks and killers.
I remember him saying a long time ago before anyone elsethat Hex: Pentimento was a problem, because it was a very strong effect and punished survivors for doing the side objective of Hexes, and amplified the strength of hexes overall (particularly the nasty ones) just by passively existing.
He took a huge amount of flack for that opinion, and yet he never walked back on it. Otz is very passionate about the game, cares about it a lot and is very receptive and respectful to others and often quite humble. Sometimes I think he listens to his chat a little too readily, but fir the most part he is very fair.
No one should blindly support any content creator, I listen to numerous content creators with varying proclivities and tend to make up my mind based on what I see from them, what I read in the forums, and what I see with my own 2 eyes. As long as someone can back up what they are saying I will listen to their argument.
Just because an opinion opposes your own is no reason to discard that opinion. If anything you should want to hear that persons opinion more, because it naturally checks you, gives you the talking points that counter yours, and helps you investigate, modify and strengthen your own argument.
For example, I disagree with Choy and TruTalent a lot, as they DO tend to give a very biased killer opinion, often are selective about the information they present, and also massively overplay the value to a point it can be hard to take them seriously, such as swearing blind that add WoO to Maps was gonna make them broken. I am aware of their bias, but that doesn't mean I automatically write off everything they're saying, and quite often they do have some valid points.
In fact with the PTB just gone, it really upset me that I was having to admit that their hystetia and doomposting was proven right, given how many people I saw blatantly ignoring genuine killer concerns and not even being willing to entertain the idea that maybe these changes weren't flawless.
So personally I think Otz does help the game massively, with insightful commentary, the support for new killers and builds he provides free on his website, the exposure he gives the game, and the pleasant and respectful culture he helps to cultivate with his kind demeanour. My only criticism if there was one, is particularly with his challenge series', he does sometimes spotlight and encourage some very nasty and unfun styles of play, with the obvious reason that it IS the most effective way to win in that instance.
Post edited by UndeddJester on3 -
I disagree with him more than I agree with him but I think most content creators are good for the game because it keeps people interested and helps build hype around future patches. It also creates a much more open area for feedback on YouTube comments if the devs even read those on content creator videos.
2 -
a wise game developer at BHVR once told me, even bad ideas are helpful to a game dev as it can inspire better ideas.
So yes, everyone here is doing their part and BHVR is very thankful to all of us.1 -
Id say yes as i learned most of the advanced parts of the game from his videos, like how to play specific killers more effectively or how to make the most out of each pallet (greeding) etc. And i find most of his points make sense from a "plays both sides" perspective.
1 -
I really don't like a lot of his opinions because it feels like he disregards the casual playerbase (As do a lot of DBD creators.). I think that's the issue rn, everyones talking about dbd in the context of it being competitive lol
0 -
The problem I have with this perspective is I myself am part of the casual survivor playerbase... I'm playing the same game as everyone else, and yet my experience of the game seems to be totally different to what everyone is complaining of.
I'm not high MMR, I have been playing 2 years, and have a 33-35% escape rate, and yet I don't run exhaustion perks, or second chance perks, and often don't even take items at all, let alone meta items... I play perfectly fine around all the issues that Survivors describe, and I've said time and time again that 90% of the issues I have in SoloQ are Survivor induced.
In the casual game, just observing half sensible unhook discipline and ensuring you run away from the hook not towards it when chased by the killer makes such a massive difference... it's only the amoebas who dumb hook you under the killers nose that truly thrown game in the toilet. That and the quitters of course, who have thankfully been dealt with.
This tends to lead me to think that a lot of the complaining of sweaty DBD play… isn't actually from the casual player base… and judging from my numerous DBD friends circles it always seems to me to be from Survivors who are pretty sweaty themselves… and to be fair… its usually the most sweaty Killers that complain as well.
1 -
Steam shows total hours with the game open, while the ones from the devs just shows in-game hours, so nothing for in menus or the bloodweb etc.
1 -
I'm not talking about mmr, I'm talking about just booting up the game not needing to worry about every little nuance the game has to enjoy it.
The game right now can snowball one way or the other, easily when a player uses specific builds. If you don't experience that I don't know what to tell you
Saying you dont experience it so it doesn't happen doesn't make it true2 -
Ah OK that makes more sense, and yeah I can't deny that, there is a knowledge glacier for sure in DBD.
Not sure there is any way to solve that though, when there are so many options for players on both sides that can all be used to gain a edge over the other side, it's just undeniable that the stronger build is gonna do better, and thus by the same token the greater knowledge base is gonna do better.
The only way you could accomodate casual players is if you drastically diminish the possible number of effects in the game... which is obviously what 2v8 does... and while I do like 2v8, I can't say I always wanna play the drastically simplified aspect of DBD all the time... the game elements of 1v4 where you're trying to figure out builds, create builds of your own and try tobleverage your strength for the beat chance to win, are elements that generally speaking I really enjoy...
It's not really possible to get both a casual game with the depth of choice DBD offers...
1 -
I think having builds is great, but it's mainly the stuff the recent update was tackling, ways to promote healthy gameplay on the killer side to give them more breathing room for chase builds while tackling more problematic builds like stacking ALL gen slowdown for survivor.
There is nothing more annoying among all my friends when we are just chatting and not even playing to win, to just sit there afk while we can't even finish a single gen vs a blight with full slowdown, and we just have meme builds.
Meanwhile on killer end there is those games where you're like omg I'm making lots of small mistakes (coz you arent very practiced) and by the time you finish your first chase you have 3 gens finished, of course killers pressure is always in the mid to late game, coz by the time you hook the first survivor and try to move you dont make it on time.
These new changes with the tweaks look to fix a lot of that or at least help get a foot in the door to fix and give both killers and survivors breathing room as it gets more iterations in the future <3
at least I hope so… LOL1 -
Yeah, full sweat Blight is as full sweat Blight does... and full sweat Survivor is just as bad.
The problem of course is MMR prioritises speed, and of course even if it didn't, you still have the issue that a lower MMR likler can still bring full sweat against a higher MMR meme Survivor team and vice versa.
And even if you remove perks from the equation, even if you have agreed perk restrictions and fun lobby tendency or something m, there is still no real way to stop either side playimg mean if they wish...
I wonder if you could do a more end game feedback type system, where you could apply votes to the opposing side based on how they play and start shifting players based on the distributions of those votes.
More comp and meta type players could receive say "hardcore" votes, while players who do more silly things can get "fun" votes, players who take off meta or quirky effects could get "experimental" votes, and role-playing players can get "immersive" votes. Over time you build a profile of a player and start pushing them more to play with players of similar proclivities in matchmaking. Maybe you include a "fair play" vote for players who tend to make a game of it more often.
Probably a little pie in he sky, but would be nice.
If nothing else I feel they should at least make more use of the positive feedback feature.
1
