Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on these and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
We encourage you to be as honest as possible in letting us know how you feel about the game. The information and answers provided are anonymous, not shared with any third-party, and will not be used for purposes other than survey analysis.
Access the survey HERE!
GUIDE: How to kill your game.
Before I you read this guide, I'd like to mention that I find myself as a killer main- logging in and then out as soon as I join a matchmaking lobby so I don't even start loading into a match as I don't bother wasting my time.
Now before I continue, I'd like to not waste any time for those about to read this.
This is a guide on how to wreck your game through dedicated servers.
For all people interested in game development, I'd suggest you read.
- Make the whole community be subject to testing something, which will deter new players from continuing to play as they don't know why certain killers face game breaking bugs, Myers not being able to stalk for example.
- Not having the option to choose if you would like to participate in this testing through using a beta client, henceforth making all people subject to test this which will make some people, like myself, avoid playing and also make new players refund as they don't know ######### is going on.
- Showing inconsistencies in the testing process, at one point the dedicated servers were up for a few days- then they were down, at which point I played. Then they got put up again, slightly improved the servers in terms of lag but the game breaking bugs were still there. That's how I noticed dedicated servers were switched back on.
- Don't do anything to offer an alternative- nor give people notice through the client itself that dedicated servers is in its testing phase and still active THROUGH THE CLIENT, hence just causing frustration to those who wish to play certain killers or want to play a good game in general.
- Leave the situation like this long enough for it to be turned into a meme.
Comments
-
Testing servers on live is not something new.
0 -
They're not but generally there's more forewarning and a discussion with the community beforehand. Most games that run major tests like this give at least a week of warning and at the very least tell the players on the launcher if not within the client itself.
The issues the OP are pointing out is mostly the lack of communication on the subject. Not everyone who plays DBD is going to follow the devs social media. Not everyone comes to the forums every day.
2 -
6. Stab it really hard
0 -
I guess I need to create a cut-and-paste response to these dumb threads. Here goes:
I have taken (and will continue to take) Behaviour to task on many major game issues, but seriously, you guys are in the wrong here.
How would you suggest they go about deploying and iterating on dedicated servers in a productive manner that isn't just a bunch of guesswork? Keep in mind that they cannot get an accurate idea of server loads or target specific latency issues by testing dedicated servers on a PTB, because the population just isn't there. This has to be tested in a live environment, with accurate population counts, in order for the developers to collect data and understand where the points of failure are.
Like, it's literally impossible for them to get this done right, without doing that. This isn't some simple thing where they can wave a magic wand and get it done without exposing it to the live player base for sustained periods. Dedicated servers are a major changeover, and one that the community has been asking for, for a long time now. Some player inconvenience is the inevitable cost of progress, if everyone really wants these servers to function. It's either stay the course, or stick with peer-based connections forever, warts and all. What would you prefer?
People whining "Well they just need to fix the big issues, like getting hit through windows, before they force us to play this!" Well, yes, they need to fix that, but they can't understand the issues without exposure. That's exactly what they're trying to fix, but they need realistic server loads to understand where and why those sorts of things become problems. Per Steamcharts, the average player count is somewhere around 20,000 players at any given time. They cannot get anywhere remotely close to that player count on a PTB. They can't just devote funds to hiring 20,000 testers for this one purpose; that is fiscally unrealistic (and I'm willing to bet that their current tests and overall server deployments aren't exactly cheap, either).
Have you ever been a part of an MMO server stress test, where they let tons of people in for a "free weekend?" It serves the same purpose: Identifying the points of failure. Except, that's on a service that has had the luxury of iterating on a system that was in place from the get-go, with a sustained beta population. In DBD's case, this is a major changeover to the entire network infrastructure on a live service, which doesn't enjoy the same advantages as a game that is currently in development.
Have you ever watched an episode of Bar Rescue? This type of stress test happens in literally every single episode, as part of the venue overhaul process. They can't understand what's wrong, without having a customer population that mimics real-world conditions. It's different because this is a video game... but, the same principles apply.
So, if you are still steamed and complaining about this based entirely on your emotional reaction to dedicated server performance, and not the realistic challenges and technical hurdles of deploying something of this scope, I again ask you: What would you suggest they do, that gets them over the hump without any further player frustration? Remember, I have just disarmed your "Well they should just fix all the stuff BEFORE putting the dedicated servers out!" angle, because that is impossible.
0 -
"-How would you suggest they go about deploying and iterating on dedicated servers in a productive manner that isn't just a bunch of guesswork? PROVIDE INCENTIVE- DOUBLE BLOOD POINTS AS COMPENSATION FOR BUG TESTING SOUNDS NICE.
"-Some player inconvenience is the inevitable cost of progress." Nice joke, maybe they could've held a vote where people could suggest possible solutions- this way it at the very least, provides the illusion of choice.
I'm afraid the angle your arguing against isn't the one I've put forward, I'd suggest understanding the context before going on a tangent. Maybe posing your questions first and then responding would've saved you a lot of time :)
For starters, yes it would be impossible to hire 20 thousand people, however; an option to enable or disabled joining the dedicated server tests for double blood points would provide incentive and NOTICE to old as well as new players, I think this is an easy and cost free solution, do you?
As for what I'd personally prefer as in the end goal for all of this, that question is easy. An enjoyable experience for all, where the journey to the end destination is filled with a little less confusion, a little more communication and at the very least, the illusion of choice if one is going to be made an involuntary bug tester especially if they're a new player.
1 -
Honestly, I've never seen a developer take a game and change the entire way it works (the entire networking/server-hosting) and re-do the thing. Sure, I've seen major overhauls and reworks, huge updates...
But most games like this? They're like, basically stay the same. DBD had a system that was different from most that require dedicated servers. But it worked.
Dedicated servers are the way to go, though. But considering they're changing a huge part of how that works and then going into this territory which I guess they aren't as familiar with? IDK...seems like they're doing okay to me. I would expect some kinks to roll out, too...and unforeseen issues.
But...I played through a lot of game launches (look at EA/DICE, for example). LOL oh man, World of Warcraft launch...
You know nothing, Jon Snow.
0
