Unpopular DBD opinions that would get you downvoted?

Yeah but my kid was literally a FNAF fan in kindergarten so they're probably not wrong 😭

being a killer main

At its core, the game isn’t broken/imbalanced as people make out. It actually gives both killer/survivor a fair chance at winning.

The imbalance comes from the individual, not the game. It’s sweaty playstyles (bully squads, tunnelling, etc) that make the game feel unfair and unfun. I also think perks have become oversaturated and we need a meta shake up again. Or better yet, try to create a more even playfield in terms of perk strengths so that we see better variety.

I am random main nobody blames anyone to be one of us.

I actually really agree with your second point. I've brought it up before on another thread—mostly by drawing from my experiences playing FFXIV, where after every instanced duty you're allowed to give a "commendation" to someone else in your party (only if you were not partied up before joining the lobby, so you can't just give comms to your friends). Getting enough commendations unlocks achievements, rewards, etc. You don't HAVE to give one out in a game if you don't want to. But honestly, whenever I leave a duty and I see the little notification that someone gave me a comm, it's really nice.

IDK it just encourages positive behaviour? Like sure, maybe people would only do it at first to get the benefits or rewards, but does it really matter why someone exhibits positive behaviour in a lobby as long as they are in fact doing it? It would foster way more good will and positivity in the community. Especially if it extended to being able to give the killer a comm as a survivor, or the killer being able to hand out a commendation to a survivor they thought was really good.

This is especially the case because console players don't get chat. There have been heaps of games where I've wanted to say something to a fellow survivor or a killer I thought was good, but couldn't because they were on console. Even in matches where I've died as survivor, there have been killers I really enjoyed and thought deserved their flowers. As it stands, the little 'thumbs up' thing doesn't really do anything. It doesn't even notify the person that they got that acknowledgement.

I just think it would be a small thing that might encourage slightly more good will and positive interactions within the player base.

I also really agree with your other two points. The first because at this point, after what they did to Myers, BHVR has effectively gutted all true horror elements from gameplay, so ######### it, let me dress up in silly clothes.

The third because it is obscene the amount of things any given player has to learn to be even passably good at the game. We're about to get our FORTY THIRD KILLER, of which each and every one has a different type of counterplay tactic you're supposed to remember. As well as how different perks work and counterplay those as well. It's bonkers to expect any casual player to remember all of that information.

At this point don't even ask me to distinguish between different gen blocking perks. The gen is blocked. At some point maybe it will be unblocked. What caused it? Good question, don't know, it is a mystery.

As a skully main i just wanna say

screw cosmetics, the gameplay is fun

Slugging will stop being a problem when killers are not actively punished for hooking survivors by many existing and future perks.

• It's been interesting to read the stuff in this thread. So here's my takes:

• This game's community has an attitude problem that is basically a part of the game's culture. It is absurd to me that new players know about and get upset by things like "tunneling" before they even know what some of the more meta perks do, and I think it's entirely an issue of player attitude. If your attitude is that certain things are bad and unfair and unskilled and personal attacks, then you are much more likely to have a bad time than if your attitude were one of self improvement, and understanding of what each side has to do to win.
  
• Both sides need to have ways to "ramp up" the pressure they put on the other side, and eliminating them entirely would lead to extremely stale gameplay. The important thing is that there's a cost/benefit analysis that happens, and that the side being pressured has tools to respond (this word is important, the tools should not NEGATE the pressure for free, they should allow a meaningful response to the pressure)
  
• A lot of the discussions about this game's balance, for some unfathomable reason, always seem to be based on the premise that "The team-side of the game cannot be expected to work as a team". I understand perfect coordination should not be expected at all times, but if the killer is playing well enough to require perfect coordination, then it's fair that the survivors should have to be perfectly coordinated. Balancing the game around survivors not being able to play as a team is just silly to me. Though I will say, the game does need more tools for better survivor coordination.
  
• The chaos of a looser matchmaking is always preferable to me. I much prefer going against very new people sometimes, and being nice to them and playing more chill, and then immediately going against hyper competitive people who clearly outplay me and are way out of my league, and everything in between, than just consistently and constantly having high pressure games against the same kinds of players, I find this latter version to be tiresome.
  
• High skill players going on incredibly high win streaks on killers (or even survivors, to be fair) does not necessarily prove that a killer is unfair or unbalanced. Most survivors have no idea what to do against high skill killers, and the same happens the other way around. What's more important for balancing is how players of similar, but good/high skill levels interact with each other, and most importantly, the cost/benefit analyses of the tools each side has available when used adequately and the cost/benefit of the other side when responding to those tools.
  
• Low skill players and new player should mostly be left out of balancing considerations. They should be given the tools to act and learn, but no one should be making balance changes based on a player's poor understanding of the game. The game should, however, change to be clearer for people, so that errors can be identified and understood by new players, so they can get better more easily. So in other words, we shouldn't coddle unskilled players so they don't get punished for misplaying, we should give them the tools to facilitate their improvement, if they choose to improve.
  
• Now for a spicy one that I have never, in 8 years of playing this game, been able to get off my mind, and it's a bias I carry, (but try to put aside when considering balance and such): The main objective survivors have to complete in order to win is "hold one button on an inanimate object, and occasionally press another one. Do this for a few seconds, then repeat." This always makes me think, in the back of my mind, that it's totally fine for killers to have more agency in their part of the game, which is the chase. Therefore, I think it's fine for killers to have about 65% of the agency in chases, so long as they have the skill to do it, cuz I do think killers should have decently high skill floors. (On the topic of player attitude I raised earlier, this used to be enough to get me to be proper upset during the first years I played the game…but I learned, changed my attitude and I'm much better for it lol)
  
• Speaking of chase agency. I think survivors have WAY more agency against some killer powers than people seem to think. While killers like Slinger, Henry, and some other projectile killers have the ultimate say because if they hit their power, they get the value, it is absolutely a fact that survivors can make it very difficult to hit them and even cause misses. Survivors that are good can mislead you with their direction, they move in unpredictable ways, they read what you're trying to do and all of these things can cause misses even on highly skilled killer players. This, imo, is a fair level of agency for survivors to have against these skillshot killers, and if the killers hit their shots despite survivors making it as hard as possible, it speaks more to the skill level of the killer player than to a flaw in the killer's design.

I think I could keep going but I think I've said plenty lol. Fun thread to read. People have so many different opinions.

In every measurable metric the game is killer sided. Please enlighten us all with your acumen.

MMR was always meant to be infinitely more like the "hidden quickplay mmr" of many other games, not the ranked points that determine if you're gold or platinum. The devs should've genuinely told us way less about the system (what specific numbers is low-mid-high-top x%, softcap, backfill matchmaking and so on), in fact it would've been beneficial for the system working properly as what it is (a matchmaking variable and nothing more) if they straight up lied in our faces and just claimed they were experimenting with the old matchmaking system.

I think this take is pretty universally popular. Or, at the very least, should not effect hindered that originates from a killer power as opposed to a perk.

you have Unbreakable

"In Dead by Daylight, pressuring survivors means forcing them to stop repairing generators and waste time on other tasks"

if this is true then slugging a survivor by definition is "pressuring the survivors" so your hot take doesnt make sense. Unless this is another "but its not fair to the survivor"?