http://dbd.game/killswitch
Honestly, I am done for now and I hope you are too
Comments
-
i dont think age or streamers has anything to do with hyper competitiveness. i been playing games since the og Atari and sega megadrive and i dont watch streamers (i rather play the game myself than watch other play it). but i still like to win whatever game im playing and often i am competitive and always have been. the choice isnt fun OR win, they can coexist together as having fun by winning and there is nothing wrong with that.
-5 -
That's cool it's not you, but anyone who got really into multiplayer gaming in the last decade or so has come into it in the age of Twitch, esports, and social media. They don't know a version of gaming that wasn't like this. They weren't just playing Mortal Kombat against friends on a Genesis after school. Even in this forum the name dropping of streamers to wild. So-and-so said this and the new video from whoever-the-hell explained it perfectly. You're expected to listen to and care about these people's opinions. I've already seen several Krasue players running the Dissolution and Bamboozle combo because it immediately spread online. It's been like a day since this character came out.
I honestly don't know how anyone past 30 can can take gaming so serious. There's probably lots of other important things in your life. This is just of so low value in a fully established adult life.
And the discussion point isn't that fun and winning are mutually exclusive because that's absurd, it's that the only way some people have fun is by winning and they don't care who they step on to get to this goal that wins you absolutely nothing in life.
3 -
i can see both sides of the coin, the casual player that doesnt take gaming seriously and the competitive must win at all cost mindset. if someone is content with their life and wants a casual easy going game thats great. likewise someone that is older and perfectly happy with their life might want to win at all cost, great. But just because people do or dont take gaming seriously isnt a reflection of their personal life goals. im fortunate enough that i am able to play games in work, i have a great life, perfectly happy but that doesnt mean i will take gaming more seriously or less seriously because im older.
The streamer thing i kinda agree with, but even before social media and streamers and even the internet i used to get gaming mags that came with tips and tricks for top games and advice for beating bosses or tactics to use in multiplayer matches. if i saw something useful or fun i might share it with my friends or surprise them by beating them using a new method i read about. Streamers are basically the modern day equivalent to the old school gaming mags, they just share the tips and tricks and advice online for free instead of a mag.
-5 -
I don't even personally tunnel all that much; I just don't decry people who do, because frequently enough, it's the optimal strategy. Players should never be faulted for using optimal strategies; if the optimal strategy is not fun to play against, that's on the developers, not the players. But the players themselves should not have to play with their opponents' fun in mind. The Survivor's Rulebook for Killers essentially shouldn't exist. I think the only thing that should be unacceptable is BMing, taking the game hostage, or stuff that's so broken it makes the game literally unwinnable (e.g. Infinites in early DbD).
By that same token, I don't fault survivors for doing gens, flashlight saving, pallet saving, stealthing, bodyblocking, prerunning, bringing powerful items/perks, or any other viable/optimal strategy, apart from pure stalling.
If it's a winning play and not designed purely to annoy the other side or keep the game going forever, it's fair game. And if you find it unfun, blame the developers, not the players.
So, do I think tunneling should be addressed? Yeah, sure. But there needs to be appropriate compensation given to Killers in exchange; the PTB's tunneling changes were too heavy-handed and too easy for Survivors to use aggressively, especially in combination with the anti-slugging changes. Things would have gotten a LOT worse for Killer players if the changes were allowed to make it to live, especially those who played low-tier Killers.
Frequently enough, the Killer simply has no logical option but to tunnel somebody; sometimes they can't find anyone other than the last survivor they hooked, sometimes the last survivor they hooked just shows up out in the open, using the anti-tunnel mechanics as a crutch; sometimes you're playing a Killer with little to no mobility and you need to chase the first Survivor you find, even if it's the last Survivor you hooked; and usually, the value of getting a Survivor out of the game as quickly as possible simply outweighs the value of getting a fresh hook.
And in case you've forgotten, there is in fact another human being behind the screen playing as Killer, and their fun is important too. Killers can't just be treated like an NPC boss for Survivors to defeat; if they are, then eventually DbD will wind up like VHS where nobody wants to play Killer and the game dies.
-2 -
only these gaming mags want nerfs and buffs to suit their agenda. They want to be competitive, but at the cost of having the other guys be at a disadvantage. Some want to be competitive whilst having no challenge. not to generalise but I often feel Many killers see the role as the power role (and it is) and also see themselves as the only competent playing side AND want the challenge to be for the survivors - yet want all the changes to be beneficial for them only.
Which is fine from a selfish point of view but is narcissistic. And I see some dedicate hours and hours to argue their case on these forums to what end? Keep advantages. So much for challenge
6 -
it does seem like there's no expectation that killers actually have skill anymore meanwhile survivors are treated like they all have 10,000 hours in the game.
also all the fun things in the game just seem to get removed. 2v8 gets removed. fog vials get removed. end game perks get removed. the game is being managed in a way to make everything weak and stale.
and this is all without even pointing out that every patch seems to break the game. many maps now have invisible walls, the static in the lobby is activating my tinnitus like no other, and ..
what the hell were they thinking nerfing an anti-tunnel and anti-slug perk when they were supposed to be releasing ant-tunnel and anti-slug mechanics.
it's like they are being sabotaged from within there's no other explanation. even sheer incompetence wouldn't look this bad.
10 -
I admit I chuckled, but unironically it's not a bad point that DBD players could benefit from CBT. I'm sure a lot of us are prone to forming bad relationships with people or things. It's definitely not healthy to stick around where you're miserable.
4 -
being asymetrical game i do think the killer should have it slightly easier than survivors. there is no fear element to playing killer, they cant be killed. but a survivor should struggle to survive and escape. sort of like an easy and hard mode. easy mode being killer role and hard mode being survivor. although i feel solo and swf have their own modes, solo being hard mode and swf being easy mode. as survivor i want the challenge of not knowing if im going to die, where the killer is, who the killer is, it adds to the horror element i want that edge of the seat feeling a true fight for survival. as killer i dont have that fear that survivors have because im the killer, i dont want to struggle against 4 unarmed survivors that that can literally run circles around me. thats just my take on the roles, i dont really know what individual streamers agendas are because i dont get involved in that sort of thing, i just play the game and voice my own opinions rather than echo a streamer.
Streamers offering tips and tricks and showing people certain tactics is fine but i do agree that streamers shouldnt have more of a say in how the game is developed. They should stick to offering people advice and playing for peoples entertainment, not influence the devs to make the game how they say it should be.
-1 -
You keep circling back to the idea that “optimal strategy” automatically excuses tunneling, but that line of thinking falls apart in a multiplayer game designed around mutual enjoyment.
First, nobody is saying killers do not deserve to have fun. Of course they do. But tunneling is not the only way to win. It is simply the most miserable way for survivors to experience the game. Survivors cannot enjoy the match when they are tunneled out two minutes in. If your fun requires denying another person’s ability to participate, then it is not “just an optimal strategy,” it is toxic behavior. Multiplayer games cannot survive long term if the “optimal” strategy is also the one most guaranteed to drive players away.
Second, blaming the devs does not absolve players. Yes, Behaviour deserves criticism for walking back changes and failing to address tunneling. But players also have free will. You choose how to play. You can chase someone else, you can spread pressure, you can make decisions that still allow the game to breathe. Hiding behind “well the devs made it possible, so I’ll abuse it” is just ego masking as logic.
Third, your survivor comparison does not hold. Survivors doing gens, saving teammates, bodyblocking, or bringing items are not equivalent to tunneling. They may be annoying but it doesn't remove you from the game. Survivors doing gens does not remove the killer from the game. Survivors flashlight saving does not delete you from the match two minutes in. Tunneling does. That is the fundamental difference. Survivors can use their tools and killers can still play. When killers tunnel, survivors cannot.
Fourth, your point about killers “sometimes having no choice but to tunnel” is overstated. Yes, sometimes the person you find happens to be the last hooked survivor. That is not what people mean when they criticize tunneling. The problem is killers making a deliberate and sustained choice to hard focus one survivor out of the game as fast as possible. That is not about necessity. It is about ego and efficiency at the cost of enjoyment.
And finally, you keep framing survivors as wanting killers to be NPC bosses. Nobody is saying that. What is being said is simple: killers can win, killers can have fun, killers can play their role effectively without tunneling. The problem is not killers existing as opponents. The problem is when killers lean on the one strategy that strips away the shared experience the game is built on.
So yes, the devs should be fixing tunneling, but let’s be real: players who knowingly abuse tunneling are not innocent bystanders. They are making a conscious choice to play in a way that causes anger, disconnections, toxicity, and uninstalls. That is why tunneling is not just an “optimal strategy.” It is the single biggest source of community frustration.
Dead by Daylight thrives when both sides get to participate. If your enjoyment relies solely on shutting down someone else’s, then it is not “optimal.” It is selfish. That is exactly why tunneling remains the most destructive force in this game. I cannot think of a single person who stopped playing this game because the killer was playing fair and not tunneling. I can however give you about a dozen IRL people I know who blacklisted this game because of this behavior. I can point you to these very forums where people are leaving because of tunneling. You say the game will die because killers will leave. Except the evidence is that its survivors who are leaving in mass, not killers. So choose how the game will die. A death fueled by hyper-competitive selfish "optimal" gamers, or one because those same players are no longer allowed to poison this community. Personally id rather a slow one where i can play the game and enjoy it than the current state where people cant even stomach the idea of playing.
7 -
Even outside of this community everyone could practice some CBT. Though hyper-competitive "win at all cost" "I'm nothing without a victory screen" players need it way more than the average joe.
You're right that a lot of us are prone to forming bad relationships…so many are attached to this game and are attached to toxic behavior lol.
5 -
For sure. I try to have everything else in my life in order so that DBD can be one of the very few negative things I keep around. 😝
4 -
Dude, exactly. Thats why I keep bringing up external validation to these guys. They really need to experience satisfaction in real life so they dont take out their dissatisfaction on people just tryin to have a decent time.
Personally if you live near water….try surfing. even if you cant stand up on the board swimming out there alone and chillin on the board is a different kind of peace i wish more ppl could experience. So much more to life than being really really good at a video game. Theyre meant to be enjoyed…not be your purpose of living lol.
7 -
To be fair, I think a lot of it is trickle down. The way DBD is handled, in my opinion, is like a mirror. The community is the way that it is primarily because the inverse is the way that it is.
3 -
I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said in this post. You’ll see I very rarely make a cameo on the forums because it’s often the same arguments and I don’t think I can add much value in that regard. However, as a player of the game who is subject to changes constantly because the voices of the loudest people is often magnified and subsequently, heard, it then impacts not just me (and anyone who plays with me will tell you I’m NOT seeking advantages for ‘my side’ for the sake of ‘winning’. This is a live service games with new additions and balances and there is a natural jostling of where to position and which direction to take the game in.
competitive players want to be competitive. Casual players want to be casual. It’s not a right or wrong but someone has to make a decision as to where to take the game. Those who want to play competitive are justified in their reasons but don’t have the right to say the game shouldn’t cater to a casual audience. And of course vice versa - ultimately it’s the devs who decide that. Imagine if this was an old school arcade game - how many would write to sega, Nintendo and co and say “nerf this immediately!” (I’m sure some did lol). The game is the game and you play it or don’t play it.obviously things ARE different now and this is the landscape we deal with. I can shut up and just read comments then accept changes and that come about from them potentially and either ‘rise to the challenge’ or leave.
I am perfectly happy with the game being one that puts the killer at an advantage - I agree with everything in this post but I don’t want the challenge to be a frustrating one. I have lost countless friends who have stopped playing this game. I myself only play now due to a handful of friends. I feel the game is approaching a stage where it is one or two bad decisions away from even more people leaving.
As much as I love this game, if I lost a few key friends I don’t think I could play it. And this isn’t a veiled threat - I mean why on earth would others care if some random person leaves the game? I’m only saying it because mine is a voice and voices need to be considered. Not just the loudest ones who think they are competitive and playing at elite level and theirs is the only ones that matter.
sorry for the rant, it’s almost 4am here and I woke up and read these forums. Any bad words are probably typos.10 -
Do you hear me complaining when Survivors use optimal strategies? Because I can tell you right now, nothing feels worse as Killer than watching gens fly by and feeling powerless to do anything about it. Or just not being able to catch anyone in chase. Or getting flashlight/pallet/wiggle saved after a long chase- I played my heart out to earn that down, only for it to amount to nothing.
And if I'm doing badly as Killer, I don't just die and move on to the next game; I have to keep playing the match until the very end if I don't want a DC penalty, keep watching the game slip further and further from my grasp. I'm essentially at the Survivors' mercy until the last one finally leaves.
Should I also intentionally run chases badly because Survivors don't like being downed? Should I not take free hits or use Exposed perks because Survivors find it unfun for chases to be over too quickly? Should I not use gen-control perks because Survivors find it annoying when they're blocked from doing their main objective? Should I not use Hex perks because Survivors find it annoying to find and cleanse them? Should I not play strong Killers because their powers let them ignore key chase mechanics? Should I not play Killers with side objectives because those can annoy Survivors?
At some point, we have to acknowledge that in virtually any game, players will naturally gravitate towards winning strategies. It's intrinsic to how games work; winning is essentially the game's way of telling you that you played correctly, that you played better than your opponent and deserve to be recognized for it. Chastising people for playing to win a game is like chastising a chef for cooking food to perfection. And (In tabletop games at least) if you don't like a particular strategy, you don't just point fingers at the player who used it; you change the rules to make the game more fun.
Name one player-versus-player game where people don't play to win; I'll wait.
-5 -
using the same logic yall could also ask for the devs to buff the killer role overall, and then survivors can deal with being miserable for a few months until they get it to a point where the anti slug or antitunnel won’t obliterate the role overall.
See how dumb that sounds?
-5 -
And it went over your head again. So let me say it very very clearly…again.
YOU CAN PLAY TO WIN. JUST DONT DO IT IN A PROBLEMATIC MANNER.
You keep trying to lump tunneling in with “every other strategy survivors dislike,” but the difference is obvious. Survivors doing gens, using flashlights, or bringing perks does not erase a killer from the match. You still get to play. When a killer tunnels, the survivor is gone in two minutes and has no game left. That is not the same thing.
Yes, losing as killer can feel bad. Watching gens fly or getting saved after a long chase is frustrating. But those things still keep both sides playing. Tunneling is unique because it directly removes one side’s ability to participate. That is why it generates so much anger and toxicity compared to anything survivors can do.
You asked if you should avoid perks or strong killers just because survivors do not like them. No one is saying that. What people are saying is that tunneling is different because it undermines the foundation of the match. The fun of DBD comes from the back-and-forth, the cat-and-mouse tension. The moment a killer hard focuses one survivor out, that shared experience collapses.
And yes, players naturally chase winning strategies. But this is not chess or poker where both sides can sit through the whole game win or lose. This is an asymmetrical multiplayer title where participation itself is part of the reward. If the “winning” play is also the one most guaranteed to make others quit the game entirely, then it is a design issue and a player choice issue.
Nobody is saying killers should throw or play poorly to spare survivors’ feelings. What we are saying is that there is a difference between playing to win and playing in a way that drives the other half of the playerbase out of the match and out of the community. That is why tunneling is not just “another optimal strategy.” It is the single most destructive one, and pretending it is the same as survivors doing gens is ignoring that fundamental reality.
so let me say it again. Because for whatever reason no matter how many times we say it. yall don't grasp it.
The issue isn't with playing to win. The issue is a specific playstyle that targets one player and prevetns them from being able to play at all. I don't tunnel. I dont camp. I win. And i do it without tunneling or falling within the realm of that childish example of "oh i guess we just need to need to baby and not actually play killer". like no dude. Just don't play in a problematic way such as tunneling. Winning isn't problematic. Trying to win isn't problematic. Preventing a dude from playing the game (tunneling) because you are desperate to win…is problematic.
"Chastising people for playing to win a game is like chastising a chef for cooking food to perfection"
In this case…it isn't like that at all. You see a chef cooks food so the other people can enjoy it. The tunneling equivalent of a chef would be instantly firing a co-worker because you're worried their dish would be better than yours.
That chef metaphor does not work here. Cooking food to perfection does not ruin anyone else’s meal. In fact, everyone benefits. But tunneling in DBD is not like making a flawless dish. It is more like a chef deliberately serving one guest their full meal while taking another guest’s plate away halfway through. One person is satisfied, the other leaves the table hungry.
That is why your comparison falls apart. Winning strategies in most games still allow everyone to keep participating until the end. Tunneling is different because it cuts people out of the experience entirely. It is not about “playing perfectly,” it is about knowingly removing another player’s ability to even play.
So no, calling out tunneling is not the same as “chastising a chef for cooking food to perfection.” It is pointing out that the chef is serving a meal in a way that leaves half the table excluded.
7 -
I'm sorry, but just telling the other side in an asymmetric game "Don't play in a way that I don't like" just isn't gonna fly.
Would you find that argument persuasive if I said something like that about Survivors? I mean, obviously not, or the conversation wouldn't have gotten to this point.
There's a whole tangled mess of incentives and rewards for Killers to tunnel, and until you deal with that, tunneling isn't going to stop anytime soon. You can scream at Killers until the end of time that they shouldn't tunnel, but I'd bet my life on it that plenty of them will keep tunneling anyway so long as the game allows it.
The sooner you accept that, the better; the sooner we can move the conversation in a productive direction and embrace solutions that actually work.
Blame the individual if you want a handful of rare exceptions, blame the system if you want results.
Or in the meantime, if you really hate tunneling that much, why don't you just main Killer? There's plenty of things to dislike about playing Killer, but getting tunneled most certainly isn't one of them.
-9 -
Killers always have the option of completely bypassing the chance at hatch. I'd say less than half of matches where im one of the last two result in a hatch opportunity. Its more than likely going to be slug for the 4k and draw the match out as long as possible just to rub it in a little more and win harder.
5 -
Its not about not playing in a way I dont like…its about promoting a healthy mutually enjoyable experience for everyone. As I have stated a multitude of times. You can have fun as killer without tunneling. You cannot have fun as survivor by being tunneled. What people are saying is “don’t deliberately play in a way that destroys the foundation of the match.” There is a difference. Survivors doing gens, using perks, or pulling off saves might frustrate a killer, but it does not erase them from the match. Tunneling does. That is why it is not just another asymmetric annoyance.
Yes, incentives and systems push killers toward tunneling, and yes, Behaviour absolutely needs to fix that. But pretending player choice doesn’t matter is letting people off the hook for knowingly making matches miserable. The system creates the pressure, but individuals decide whether to lean into it or not. Both can be true at the same time: the devs deserve blame for design failures, and players deserve blame for choosing ego-driven play that ruins the experience for others. you are not absolved from responsibility because there is someone with more influence than you. There's a term for this…its called "self-governess".
And telling survivors “just play killer if you don’t like being tunneled” is a non-argument. That is like saying if you hate cheaters, just play single-player games. It dodges the issue instead of addressing it. Survivors should not have to switch roles just to avoid being removed from the match in two minutes. I would also like to mention that I AM a killer main, but I would like to play survivor more because after 3-3.5k hours of killer…I want something fresh. Unfortunately all of my friends quit survivor due to tunneling and I cannot stomach it anymore…due to tunneling. And a third point against your "just dont play survivor" argument is….queue times. Remember when you said the game would die if killers left? Well the game would also die if survivors left. Take a moment and imagine what would happen if all survivors who are tired of tunneling just didn't play survivor. Survivor is already 4/5 of a lobby my guy.
If the goal is “productive solutions,” then we have to acknowledge reality. Tunneling is the biggest source of toxicity in this community. Saying “it will always happen so stop complaining” is not a solution, it is surrender. The only way forward is both: systems that reduce the incentive to tunnel, and a player culture that accepts you can win and have fun without leaning on the most destructive strategy in the game.
7 -
Would you find that argument persuasive if I said something like that about Survivors?
What actions can survivors perform that is their equivalent of tunneling?
9 -
And it went over your head again. So let me say it very very clearly…again.
YOU CAN PLAY TO WIN. JUST DONT DO IT IN A PROBLEMATIC MANNER.
You keep trying to lump tunneling in with “every other strategy survivors dislike,” but the difference is obvious. Survivors doing gens, using flashlights, or bringing perks does not erase a killer from the match. You still get to play. When a killer tunnels, the survivor is gone in two minutes and has no game left. That is not the same thing.
Yes, losing as killer can feel bad. Watching gens fly or getting saved after a long chase is frustrating. But those things still keep
both sidesplaying. Tunneling is unique because it directly removes one side’s ability to participate. That is why it generates so much anger and toxicity compared to anything survivors can do.You asked if you should avoid perks or strong killers just because survivors do not like them. No one is saying that. What people are saying is that tunneling is different because it undermines the foundation of the match. The fun of DBD comes from the back-and-forth, the cat-and-mouse tension
ehw, but maybe not everyone like the same thing like u. for me this "cat and mouse" is super super, super, SUPER boring.
but on the flip side: I like the tunnel. I like the first chase. this round is mine. the first chase is mine. I know all resources are still up. I have control over the first resources and the zone that’s being played. I have the control to avoid key gens. I probably have the most interaction with the killer this match, the most chase time out of everyone, and the thing that’s the most fun in this game: the chase. it’s like a custom 1vs1. and my job in that situation is to buy as much time as possible.
-11 -
Doing gens. Not screwing around with totems or other side objectives, just doing your main objective as efficiently and effectively as possible. Because in case you've forgotten, the Killer's objective is to kill the Survivors, and tunneling is generally a very effective way to accomplish that; once one Survivor is out of the game, the rest are in a greatly weakened position and can be dispatched much more easily.
I'm sorry, but fun is subjective. There's lots of things I hate more than tunneling, even when playing Survivor; I'm genuinely more upset by a Killer who chooses to BM and be a jerk in the endgame chat than a Killer who plays to win in the scummiest ways possible.
So unless you've got some way to prove that your subjective experience of DbD is objectively correct, it's simply your word against mine when it comes to which optimal strategies are or aren't "problematic" or worthy of condemnation.
And I disagree; the biggest source of toxicity in this game is BM. Because there are plenty of incentives and rewards to use optimal strategies that might upset the other side, but there's absolutely no material benefit to taunting your opponents other than upsetting them. There's no real excuse for it.
-7 -
I'm just commenting to say I appreciate how thoughtful, researched and reasonable your comments on this issue have been. You've been really articulate in explaining what the primary issue here is, why it's such a problem, and why it isn't comparable to any survivor behaviour.
Because nothing a survivor does (short of cheats) can make a killer physically unable to play the game, the killer will always have agency. A survivor who gets hard tunnelled out is just flat out being denied the chance to even play at all.
9 -
Would you find that argument persuasive if I said something like that about Survivors?
Personally, yes. I have stated this multiple times. However...
Doing gens.
When push comes to shove, the killer community cannot think of anything they actually dislike, except for one thing: losing.
And that's not something we can 'fix'.
Come up with an actual problem and you'll get support.
9 -
You keep framing this as “my subjective experience versus yours,” but tunneling is not just a matter of taste. It has measurable effects on match health and community health that go far beyond whether one person personally dislikes it.
Yes, BM is toxic. Nobody disputes that. But BM is just words and taunts at the end of the match. Tunneling actively removes people from the match itself. It is not comparable. BM is salt after the game; tunneling is ripping one person’s controller out of their hands two minutes into the match. Which do you think drives more disconnects, ragequits, and uninstalls?
And again, doing gens is not equivalent. Survivors doing gens does not erase the killer from the match. The killer still gets to play. Tunneling erases survivors entirely. That is why it is unique among “optimal strategies.” Survivors can push gens all they want, but the killer still plays until the exit gates. A survivor tunneled out has no match left to play. That is the difference you keep glossing over.
You also say fun is subjective. Sure, what we all find fun can vary. But there is a broader principle here: multiplayer games require mutual enjoyment to survive. If one strategy systematically causes mass frustration and drives away the larger player base, then it is not just “subjective dislike,” it is an existential problem for the game. Survivor already makes up 4/5 of every lobby. If enough survivors decide tunneling makes the game unplayable, queue times collapse and the game dies. That is not subjective. That is math.
Finally, dismissing player choice as irrelevant is weak. Yes, Behaviour created systems that incentivize tunneling, but players are still responsible for how they act within those systems. That is where self-governess comes in. You cannot hide behind “the system made me do it.” You make the decision every chase whether to lean into tunneling or not. Players who constantly choose the most destructive strategy are not innocent bystanders. They are part of the reason the community is in this state.
So no, tunneling is not “just another optimal strategy” or “just a subjective annoyance.” It is the most consistent generator of anger, disconnects, and survivor attrition in the game. If the goal is to keep DBD alive, then both system changes and player responsibility are needed. Anything less is just an excuse to keep playing selfishly at the expense of everyone else’s enjoyment.
You want evidence that tunneling is a problem? Just scroll through the forums and you will find thread after thread of people complaining about it. You will find thread after thread of people saying theyre leaving because of it.
I honestly don’t know how to make this point any clearer. I have said it countless times, yet people either ignore it, pretend it was never said, or prove they have no grasp of basic interpersonal emotional intelligence. The reality is simple: tunneling is one of the biggest sources of grievance, anger, toxicity, and player loss in this game.
Multiplayer games are built on mutual enjoyment. If, being generous, 30 percent of the community enjoys tunneling but the other 70 percent despise it, then balance should reflect that majority. The goal should be to create an environment where the larger share of players can enjoy the game, not where the enjoyment of a minority comes at the direct expense of everyone else.
It is like being at a house party where nine out of ten people want cheese pizza, and one person asks for anchovies. The anchovy guy would still be perfectly fine with cheese. So what do you order? You get the pizza that satisfies the majority. You do not pick the one option that will ruin the meal for almost everyone just because one person insists it is “technically valid.”
3 -
Thanks for the affirmation my pretty bird themed friend ❤️
its just mind boggling how a simple concept of mutual enjoyment is lost on them lol.
6 -
You know, Dead by Daylight is one of the only games I've played where people will consistently try to paint you as the bad guy simply for using an optimal strategy.
If you can't handle losing, or in this case, losing early and not feeling like you had much of a chance to do anything, then maybe playing Survivor just isn't for you. That isn't a judgment, merely a suggestion. It's a teamwork-dependent role where you can easily be deprived of all agency, and that's how it will remain.
Even if we put an end to tunneling once and for all, you're still going to have games where the Survivors lose early after the Killer snowballs, or games where you're just left to die on hook because your teammates screw up or the Killer proxy camps, or games where you loop the Killer for a full 10 minutes but die anyway because your teammates don't know how to do gens, or they leave you on hook after the exit gates are open, or the Killer has Rancor, or some nonsense like that.
-5 -
Had to go back and make sure I said "equivalent." In what way does doing gens incapacitate the killer or shove them out of the match with 7k points in two minutes?
once one Survivor is out of the game, the rest are in a greatly weakened position and can be dispatched much more easily.
Wow thanks for explaining that I had no idea.
4 -
Because nothing a survivor does (short of cheats) can make a killer physically unable to play the game, the killer will always have agency.
I don't know why this simple statement is so hard to grasp. You can maybe not care, but at least accept it.
7 -
As I said, if that's what bothers you about tunneling, then at some point you have to recognize that Survivor will never realistically be what you want it to be.
Unless we're going to go so far as to fundamentally change the way downs and hooks work, it will always be possible for a Survivor to spend the overwhelming majority of their match unable to do anything meaningful.
-7 -
dude. Just reread my other posts. Already addressed all of this. Quite literally addressed the “can’t handle losing” thing in like every post. Take the time to reread. Really focus on it. Let it sink in. Then think about the consequences of selfish behavior. Probably a good exercise in general as it’s applicable to the real world too.
5 -
Mate, I'm non-binary. If you think calling me selfish simply for playing the game by the rules is going to move me, you've got another thing coming. Every day people call people like me selfish simply for demanding basic respect or to be treated as an equal.
You're the selfish one here, shaming others for not playing according to your arbitrary standards, despite the fact that it's a completely valid way to play the game.
-7 -
What is "that" referring to? Is "that" the fact that one side has full agency and that the other four are at the mercy of that one player's whims or morals? Does that seem like a totally okay place for the game to be? That one role is potentially the punching bag for the other?
This is one of the only games you've seen with this sort of complaint? You've never seen people get mad at camping and spawn sniping in a shooter? Frowned upon tactics are as old as gaming.
Post edited by cogsturning on6 -
Dude, serious, stop missing the point on purpose. I am talking about 2016 to 2021. That was the time killer got nerfed EVERY patch, until the point, that so many killer mains quit, that they had to change direction. Now FOUR years later, killer got back into a half way decent spot again, but a lot of the shenanigans from back in the days i still up and running. Some core mechanics are still messed and could be fixed easyly. Looping? Just bring the collisionboxes from killer and survivor closer to each other. You got reduce the effect of bloodlst accordingly. Unfortunatly, they already tied other mechanics to bloodlust, so you can't get rid of it all together. And don't let me get started about the bugs,that became features. The game as issues with the playerbase, because to many survivor are crybabies. They start playing a "asymetrical horror survival game" and exoect to win 1v1 against the powerrole or to escape more often than not. All that nonesense is fake news. During that time, I watched every dev stream, read all patch notes, check all the major youtuber and nothings first with your claims.
-4 -
Yes, there is a chance that in a particular game I might be unable to do anything meaningful.
The problem is that this isn't a rarity. This is something that is happening with increasing frequency to a lot of survivor players. That they, because of the actions of the killer (incentivised by the devs decisions and implementation of mechanics), are essentially denied the ability to play at all.
I'm not asking for a perfect game, I'd just like to actually spend more of my time playing the game. Or not have people around me stop playing because they got the brunt of tunnelling too many times and decided 'if I'm not going to get to actually play anyway, might as well save the storage space on my PC/console'.
5 -
And I welcome the addition of anti-tunnel mechanics. Y'know… if they're actually implemented well.
At this point, this argument is mostly about bleep275 passing moral judgment against Killers who tunnel.
Which, in my view, falls flat when they give no such treatment to any of the things Survivors can do to make the experience of playing Killer miserable. I genuinely find it more annoying to be forced to stay the entire length of a game where I'm already really behind than to be tunneled out of the game early, because with the latter, I can very easily just queue into the next game.
-4 -
Which, in my view, falls flat when they give no such treatment to any of the things Survivors can do to make the experience of playing Killer miserable.
Again, tell me the equivalent. I haven't had a group of survivors make me miserable since I was new and encountered bully squads. And Lightborn took care of that, which is another thing there's no survivor equivalent for. I can't slap on a perk that makes me untunnelable.
6 -
I’m not calling you selfish to provoke you. I’m calling you selfish because your stance is exactly that. And I doubt people are labeling you selfish for the reasons you assume. If your arguments here mirror how you behave outside this space, then it might be worth some honest reflection on your outlook and behavior. You may be misattributing the criticism. You think people criticize you for one reason, when it’s really another. But that is a whole different topic and one meant for a licensed therapist.
Back to the topic at hand.
Your argument, boiled down, is: “Tunneling is fine because I enjoy it, only my win matters, and everyone else can suck it up.”
Meanwhile, everyone else’s argument is: “Tunneling isn’t fine because it ruins group enjoyment and fosters toxicity. Videos games should be fun for everyone involved and tunneling destroys that.”
See the difference? Your reasoning revolves entirely around your own satisfaction. The satisfaction of one person is all that matters. The counterpoint takes into account the experience of the larger group. One view is self-serving. The other is community-minded.
So tell me how me advocating for a healthy mutually enjoyable for all 5 members of a game trial play style is selfish. But you only taking into consideration one player (you), is not selfish.
Explain to me why wanting to balance the game in a manner that doesn’t leave the lobby and the community as a whole in a state of hate and disarray, is a problem. But you supporting the behavior that causes so much strife is totally ok.
Video games are meant for fun. Multiplayer games are meant for mutually enjoyable experience. If you only care about you, what affects you, and not at all about the overall health of the game. You should not play multiplayer games. Go play a single player game and live out that power fantasy. You can be as “optimal” as you want there and won’t ruin the day of other gamers while you do it.
Here’s a little exercise for you: play a few rounds with friends, or even strangers. Pay attention to how much laughter there is, how people talk, and the overall mood. Try it two ways: once where you “play optimally” with nothing but your win in mind, and once where you play with the goal of mutual enjoyment. You’ll notice the difference. One style leaves people frustrated and quiet. The other leaves people laughing, positive, and actually having fun.
Every online survivor friend I’ve made came from matches where I played well as killer. I was entertaining, impressive, or just plain funny at times. Even when I dominated, the match stayed positive because the goal wasn’t only my satisfaction. Even when I let the final survivor live they refused to leave the match because they enjoyed the experience that much.
And honestly? I don’t know why I’m even spelling this out. You’ll probably brush it off or pretend it doesn’t apply. Empathy, perspective-taking, collaboration, social responsibility…all those skills that make someone fun to play with…just aren’t showing up here.
Plays selfishly…”why does everyone call me selfish. Am I selfish? No, it is the children who are wrong”.
Doesn’t play selfishly…”what a nice experience we’re all having”
5 -
did you consider that the reason we’re not talking about survivor toxicity is because…that isn’t the topic? The OP described frustration over the lack of the promised anti-tunnel update features. My comments were about tunneling. Your replies to me were about tunneling.
I’m not going to shift the topic to an unrelated argument. If you want to talk about survivor toxicity…go make a thread for it.
6 -
If you want to talk about survivor toxicity…go make a thread for it.
Chiming in here to say: Please actually do, because I am sick and tired of this particular problem almost exclusively being brought up as a 'gotcha' in response to survivors voicing their complaints.
8 -
as a killer main myself I actually agree, the game is far too easy for us when its solos and even a swf can get steamrolled by someone running the ghoul and zero perks if they try not even try hard just try but if they bring 4 good perks its just game unless they never touched the game before
so yeah I'd actually agree with a difficulty hike for a bit because even when I run lower tier killers and lower tier perks even when just playing around and having fun I accidentally kill people and get 4ks
2 -
Every day people tell me I should put other people's satisfaction before my own. They expect me to give up my dignity, my self-respect, my health, my personal life, my name, my identity, my body, and they just keep taking. You might find that hard to believe if you yourself are not marginalized, but I assure you that's not an exaggeration, merely a statement of fact. To survive under such circumstances requires learning not to listen to people who don't have your best interests in mind.
I'm happy to show kindness to those in need or those who are willing to build genuine bonds with myself and others around them, but this is not that. This is other people expecting me to put their fun before my own, people who have no interest in reciprocating and feel justified in treating me like an NPC boss to amuse themselves with rather than another person behind the screen who's doing their best to win.
I'm quite capable of kindness, but I am not your bootlick. If you want my respect, earn it.
And frankly, it sounds to me like we simply want different things out of DbD. There are quite a few Survivor players who are genuinely disappointed when the Killer purposefully plays nice, who wanted to test themselves against a Killer genuinely doing their best to win; that's where Comp DbD players come from.
So instead of pointing fingers at people who want something else out of the game, why don't you just start asking BHVR for a casual queue? You can play nice to your heart's content, and I can play to win without people yelling at me for using basic strategy. Everybody wins.
-7 -
For the billionth time, this isn’t about forcing killers to “play nice.”
It’s not about survivors being bad.
It’s not about being a nice killer
It’s not about crippling the killer role.
It’s not about babying survivors.
It. Is. About. Fun. And. Health.
You can absolutely dominate survivors. Go right ahead. I do it. Every killer does it. But there’s a way to do it without being toxic. There’s a way to win without singling out one person and making the game unplayable for them. No one will be mad if your domination is a reflection of your skill overwhelming them. They will blame MMR not you. Or just be genuinely impressed. At this point, it feels like you’re deliberately ignoring everyone’s actual argument.
The issue is simple: tunneling is toxic. That’s it. Stop twisting it into strawman excuses. Stop trying to change the topic. Killers can still win. You can still play competitively. You just don’t need to do it through tunneling. That’s not “playing nice,” that’s just not being a selfish, anti-social player.
Yes, the community has also asked for casual reinforcements, like a permanent 2v8 mode. But that’s another discussion. This thread is about tunneling. Not survivor toxicity. Not ranked vs. casual modes. Tunneling. Period. Tunneling and Casual game modes are not mutually exclusive. Tunnelers will still flock into casual modes to take advantage of the more relaxed gamers.
even in a strictly ranked mode you WILL get flamed. You would get flamed no matter one in a ranked mode. Study after study shows comp gamers have an increasingly high rate of toxicity especially relative to “just for fun” players. I mentioned a peer-reviewed psychological study in an earlier comment that supports this.And here’s the truth: tunneling is selfish. It ruins the match for four or five people at once. Think of it like five friends hanging out. Four of them are about everyone having fun, while one only cares about their own enjoyment. That one doesn’t get invited back. Social activities come with responsibility. If you keep acting anti-social, you can’t be shocked when people turn on you.
If you want to play a game without the community hating you, maybe it’s time to reflect. You can’t be selfish and then play victim when people react to your selfishness.
Plays in a way that generates hate and anger → “Why is everyone always mad at me?”
And then you drop quotes like “To survive under such circumstances requires learning not to listen to people who don’t have your best interests in mind.” Ironic, isn’t it? You wield that as your defense for apathy, when you yourself have no one’s best interest in mind but your own. You’ve grown a shell from being treated with the same indifference you dish out.
NOTE: I said anti-social a few times. For anyone reading this I’m not talking about the casual use of anti-social where someone is just super introverted. I’m referring to the clinical use of the word meaning a lack of empathy and a disregard for social cohesion/standards.4 -
And I say tunneling is not toxic anymore than doing anything else that makes the opposing team lose is. Saying tunneling is toxic is a cool subjective opinion, but over here in reality, I don't hold it against people for playing to win the game.
I never agreed to play "nice" with the Survivors before I queued up, nor did they agree to play "nice" with me, nor is it against the game's rules to play to win, so why should I fault them for using game mechanics as intended?
Dead by Daylight is a 4v1 game. If the 1 ever wins out against the 4, four people's days have been ruined. That's kinda unavoidable. But I've got two unfortunate truths for you: The first is that if the 1 never gets to have fun and instead has to facilitate everyone else's fun (Which is absolutely NOT the Killer's job, mind you; they're a Killer, not a Dungeon Master- your in-game success is measured by how many kills you get, not by how much fun the Survivors had), then nobody will want to play as the 1, and you have no game.
The second is that I know this is difficult for you to comprehend, but people who are different from you are, in fact, your equals, and are entitled to the same dignity, respect and kindness that you demand for yourself. I don't expect Survivors to gimp themselves solely so that I can have more fun playing Killer, and in return I expect the same treatment. But you, on the other hand, seem to think you deserve a level of respect from Killers that you absolutely refuse to reciprocate, and you seem to view being asked to earn other people's respect as a slap in the face.
-5 -
You keep trying to frame tunneling as “just another winning play,” but that ignores the unique impact it has on match health. Doing gens, using perks, or pulling off saves might frustrate the killer, but it does not remove them from the match. Tunneling removes survivors from the match entirely, sometimes within two minutes. That is not “just playing to win.” It is the one strategy that directly erases a player’s ability to participate. That is why it draws so much heat compared to anything survivors can do.
Nobody is asking killers to “play nice” or throw games for the sake of survivor feelings. What people are saying is that multiplayer games only survive when the enjoyment is shared. Survivors make up four of the five slots in every lobby. If the most efficient killer strategy also happens to be the one that consistently drives survivors away from the game, then yes, it is a problem worth calling out. Dismissing that as “subjective” is short-sighted when it threatens the very player base that keeps the game alive.
And your Dungeon Master comparison misses the point. Nobody is asking killers to be DMs or facilitators. Killers can win, killers can have fun, and killers can play aggressively without tunneling. What people are pushing back against is the idea that “anything goes as long as it is technically allowed.” By that logic, face-camping used to be fine, infinite loops used to be fine, and anything that was once in the game but later changed would still be beyond criticism. Yet Behaviour has adjusted those things because they damaged match health. Tunneling falls into the same category.
Finally, let’s flip your point about dignity and respect. Survivors are also human beings sitting behind their screens. If your “fun” relies on denying theirs, then you are not treating them as equals. You are treating them as disposable props for your ego. Respect goes both ways, and pretending tunneling is just normal competitive play is ignoring the massive imbalance of how it affects one side versus the other.
So no, tunneling is not the same as any other strategy. It is the most consistent generator of grievance, DCs, toxicity, and player loss. Calling that out is not asking killers to be “nice.” It is asking them to acknowledge that winning does not have to come at the expense of destroying the experience for everyone else.
"But you, on the other hand, seem to think you deserve a level of respect from Killers that you absolutely refuse to reciprocate"
That's rather presumptuous personal attack. When i do play survivor I also play with the intent to not be toxic and do things they hate. In fact when the killer is having a really rough match I let them sacrifice me at the end. I don't, however, respect people who use their free will to make a choice that undermines the enjoyment of quite literally but them. This isn't unique to me. This is a principle that has been the foundation of society since…well ever. Even Ancient Egyptian religion stated that to live with goodness will result in a light or balanced heart and be rewarded with the afterlife. While selfishness would result in a heavy heart and result in the cessation of your existence. Even people thousands of years ago understood this…so why is it so hard now?
"If the 1 ever wins out against the 4, four people's days have been ruined"
That single sentence shows exactly how far every counterpoint in this thread has flown over your head. I will redirect you once again to literally every comment I have made where I stress that this conversation is not about winning or losing. I have repeated it because you keep recycling the same point as if nobody has addressed it. I am not the only one who replied to you countering this point.
You seem incapable of grasping the idea that fun can be shared. You seem incapable of grasping that enjoyment in a multiplayer game does not have to be tied strictly to victory. People can lose and still have a good time if the match is engaging, balanced, and interactive. The fun of Dead by Daylight comes from the chases, the mind games, the escapes, the clutch saves, and the tension of trying to outplay the other side. Winning amplifies that, sure, but it is not the only source of enjoyment.
Tunneling strips away that dynamic by removing one person from the experience far too early. It turns what should be a tense back and forth into a lopsided stomp where one player is excluded and the others are left frustrated. That is why so many people describe tunneling as toxic, not because they cannot handle losing but because they are being denied the chance to even play.
If your entire worldview of the game boils down to “killer wins equals survivors lose, and survivors lose equals no fun,” then you are missing the fundamental design philosophy of asymmetrical multiplayer. The goal is not to make one side miserable so the other can feel powerful. The goal is to create matches where both sides are challenged and both sides have opportunities for enjoyment, even if only one technically wins.
If you want a Dungeon Master analogy. Imagine if the Dungeon Master only targeted one specific player at the start to kill of their character and didn't let them rejoin as a new character. So the player is just forced to watch everyone else play while they were robbed from the experience because of ONE persons pettiness. Or if they were able to rejoin, every time the Dungeon Master repeatedly targeted that one person, killing them off before they even get a chance to enjoy or integrate into the campaign. I am willing to bet the campaign would be wildly unpopular and would dissolve quickly.
Multi-player video games aren't for your sole sense of validation and ego. Any situation where more than one person is involved is not about a singular persons interest and satisfaction. Quite literally the point of communities and the foundation of society as a whole.
Your argument: "My enjoyment matters only. Winning is what matters. Fun is impossible without victory"
Everyone else's argument against you: "Everyone should have fun, even if each of us have to make sacrifices, that balance is important"
Imagine being in a relationship where your partner only ever cared about their own happiness. You would probably end it, because no healthy relationship can survive that kind of imbalance. The same principle applies across all relationships, whether romantic, platonic, or otherwise. Cooperation requires give and take. Partnership requires both sides to make sacrifices. If one person gives everything while the other refuses because “it is more optimal for me not to,” that is the definition of a toxic dynamic. The exact same thing can be applied to tunneling. The only arguments for tunneling boils down to selfishness. If you lack the self-governess to consciously avoid harmful behaviors…that is a serious problem even outside of video games.
6 -
If you really think tunneling is so bad for the health of the game, by all means, ask the devs to change the game. I'll be right there with you; I'd be happy to try and help brainstorm an anti-tunneling system that feels fair for both sides. I welcomed the anti-facecamp system when it first came out; if anything, I sometimes feel like they should have gone even further to discourage proxy camping and the like. I distinctly remember a match when I tried to use the anti-facecamp against a Blight that was proxy camping, chasing me right under the hook, and being disappointed when it failed.
But that's not what this is about, is it? No, it's not enough for you to simply advocate for practical solutions to problems in the game's design. You want to extract apologies from Killer players, you want to have power over them. If they give reasoning for why they played in a way that you don't like, it's always not good enough somehow. They have to grovel lower, give you more attention, give you more opportunity to farm clout off of their humility.
Yes, indeed, cooperation requires give and take, reciprocity. If you expect one person to give everything, play poorly on purpose purely to facilitate the other person's enjoyment, while the other refuses to do the same because the rules somehow don't apply to them- and in fact tries to paint themselves as the victim when they demand fair treatment- that is the definition of a toxic dynamic.
The exact same thing applies to tunneling. Survivors expect Killers to go easy on them despite refusing to go easy on Killers. If you lack the self-awareness to see how everything you say can be applied to you personally… I'm genuinely worried for anyone who has to deal with you in real life.
-3 -
You are twisting this into something it is not. Nobody here is demanding apologies from killers or begging for them to “grovel.” What people are saying, over and over, is that tunneling is uniquely destructive to the health of matches. Pointing that out is not about clout or power, it is about protecting the long-term playability of the game.
Yes, practical solutions are absolutely needed. You will notice that many of us are calling for Behaviour to implement changes that reduce the incentive to tunnel, just like they did with facecamping. That does not mean players are absolved in the meantime. Self-governess matters. You can recognize that something is technically allowed by the system while also recognizing that spamming it at every opportunity damages the experience for others.
And your “survivors expect killers to go easy” line is a strawman. Nobody is asking killers to throw games or play poorly on purpose. Survivors expect killers to play in a way that allows everyone to actually participate. There is a massive difference between “going easy” and “not removing someone from the match in two minutes.” You can play hard, use strong killers, use meta perks, and still spread pressure instead of tunneling someone out immediately. That is not “playing poorly,” that is playing in a way that keeps the match engaging.
As for reciprocity, the comparison does not hold. Survivors doing gens or making saves does not erase the killer from the game. The killer still plays until the gates are powered or the survivors are dead. Tunneling, on the other hand, erases survivors from the game entirely. That imbalance is why it is called toxic. Survivors cannot reciprocate something that does not exist in their toolkit.
You accuse people of lacking self-awareness, but think about what you are defending. You admit tunneling is effective, you admit it frustrates survivors, and you admit it hurts the health of matches, yet you refuse to take even partial responsibility for choosing to do it. Blaming everything on the devs while ignoring your own role in making the community miserable is the opposite of self-awareness.
This is not about demanding apologies. It is about acknowledging that fun can be mutual, that wins can feel earned without tunneling, and that both system changes and player responsibility are required if this game is going to remain healthy.
"If they give reasoning for why they played in a way that you don't like, it's always not good enough somehow"
This is not even remotely the case. You are just being hyper-defensive at this point. The only ‘reasoning’ you have given me boils down to ‘selfishness is fun for me.’ Selfishness is never an acceptable excuse for anything. Nobody is going to fault you for rehooking someone who is bodyblocking or blatantly toxic in a match. That is not the issue.
What this entire debate is about is needless, warrantless tunneling done solely on the grounds of ‘it is optimal to ruin someone else’s experience so I can win.’ That is what people call toxic tunneling. If there are other reasons, I am fine with it and I will support it. I have even laughed with friends who got tunneled because they were being obnoxious and said, ‘yeah, you deserved that.’ The problem is tunneling based on selfish reasoning. This point was made at the very start of the thread and is made in every discussion on tunneling. Pro-tunnelers need to stop pretending that strawman arguments and ignoring nuance are valid defenses for toxic behavior.
And frankly, the constant personal attacks and backhanded comments like the one you just made only show that you are arguing out of pettiness and personal bias, not out of genuine concern for balance. If you are getting that worked up, maybe take a step back before continuing this discussion. Also (ima be petty here too), if the like to dislike ratio of our comments says anything…I am not the one that people would have an issue with.
You keep bringing up the same arguments over and over again that I, and several others have already addressed in this thread. Arguing for the sake of arguing does nothing for anyone. I suggest you take a step back. Take a deep breath. Reread the thread. And if you can think of new arguments and can approach them maturely…come on back to the discussion. Otherwise this is working you up and not accomplishing anything for anyone.
3 -
If I were to stop tunneling altogether tomorrow, go out of my way to never hook the same Survivor consecutively (I usually don't even keep track of Survivors' hook states), I guarantee you that Survivors wouldn't stop calling me a sweaty tryhard or baby killer or somesuch. They'd say I'm not allowed to play high-tier Killers, so I'd switch back to Knight. Then they'd say Knight is annoying to play against, so I switch to Wraith. Then they'd say my perks are stupid or I proxy camped too much, etc. etc. etc..
None of this is necessary; there will always be one more thing.
And if, at any point, playing with all those handicaps is finally too much for me, there'd be a whole lot of "gg ez" in the endgame chat.
The Survivor Rulebook for Killers can go to hell. It's a meme, and it should have died years ago. Stop trying to dictate how other people play.
-6 -
One thing that bothered the most about the PTB discussion is how some people just minimized the anti-slug system impact, since it was as strong as the anti-tunnel system was - an even stronger in some scenarios.
If they gave killer some form of compensation for alternating hooks instead of tunneling, they should really give something to make the act of hooking easier and faster since slugging will be one of the worst decisions a killer can take.
0
