http://dbd.game/killswitch
Any chance that we will get an FoV slider?
Comments
-
I don't believe a FOV slider would be added due to the actual advantage that is given in game to this - hence you have the perk to do that for you.
14 -
It'd help killers have an actually useable fov, so its unlikely it'd ever happen.
Has been requested aince the dawn of time.
3 -
The red stain shows your field of vision to survivors. Increasing your FoV would make BHVR have to actually make the stain scale based on what the killer sees, or it would be giving deceptive information to survivors.
Seeing how perks affect FoV, range of vision is something the devs think is core to balance. Being able to change something like that would be unfair, just like how it's somehow unfair for killers to have ears during a chase and thus need to have 100 decible chase music deafening them all the time.
1 -
Dead by Daylight, a game that turns brightness and FOV sliders into items.
6 -
Logic? Rework that perk to something else and implement a FOV slider. What's OS difficult about that? As if FOV would give you such a huge advantage and messes up the balance. Even shooter high competetive shooter games have a FOV slider and dbd is just casual party game.
0 -
Because killer's vision is a key game play mechanic. It has to be to what it is for very specific reasons.
QOL/Accessibility should NEVER come at the cost of game play.
Really don't see how this is so hard to understand. Giving out free Shadowborn is a clear advantage to killer.
7 -
It sucks that you get motion sickness from the FOV, but allowing people to increase the FOV at will is pretty game breaking.
If you get motion sick that easy sorry to say maybe DBD isn't for you. It's made that way for a reason and if you let people adjust the FOV absolutely NO killer would ever play on the default FOV. A wider FOV is a huge advantage in this game.
Accessibility should not come at the cost of game play.
4 -
I don't think so. Still, the base FoV should be increased by at least 5-10°. The game is nauseating at 87°
0 -
@Sairek "Again, it's only game breaking because the game was balanced in a way that it would be game breaking. That's BHVR's fault. If their game is so unbalanced, that giving people a 80~110 FOV slider would completely break the balance game, then the game isn't balanced in the first place."
It's actually not their fault. FOV limits are inherent to the game because the killer is in first person. There is literally no way to avoid this besides giving the killer a third person camera, which completely changes the dynamic of the game. Like I can't see how you can argue this. You cannot make the killer first person and balance the game without a specific FOV.
Adding a FOV slider (or colorblind options) would 1000% be abused by players that don't need it. Therefore, it's best to not have them. Sucks for the people that need it but yea, game balance comes first. If you put your own experience over the integrity of the game that is selfish.
Other games can do it because it's not an inherent balance aspect of the game. Everyone plays COD from first person view. If you give them an FOV slider it's not hurting the game's design. If you give colorblind options, it's not hurting the game's design. That's because COD is not based around the idea you should be HIDING from another player. You can do this, but it's not what the game was built on. DBD on the other hand was built on the fact that players need to hide. Anything that affects that directly affects balance.
2 -
Idk if devs would know how to implement that.
They can't even add graphics options...
0 -
I wish they would fix Ultrawide, playing with Monitor and Abuse is a requirement to have a normal FOV as killer.
0 -
"Again, if it would make it a little bit easier to find survivors as killer, then make it a little bit easier for survivor to hide in other ways to compensate."
You are literally asking them to change core game design to allow for an FOV slider. You realize that is NOT at all practical. They'd have to redesign entire tiles and maps. The time and cost of this would be astronomical and completely change how the game works at the most basic level.
That's like asking them to change how pallets and windows work to fix loops. It's literally a different game at that point.
Not only that, now you are FORCING killers to play with the highest FOV, because if you play anything lower you are at a disadvantage.
Just accept it won't happen. It CAN'T happen. If it does then you cause too many balance issues. @MandyTalk even explained exactly this to you.
2 -
If survivors need a basically blind killer to juke properly, well then they are just bad at juking.
0 -
Maybe in DBD 2 they could start the game from the ground up with a greater FOV for killers but you can't seriously expect them to make such a drastic change like that in the current game. Is it possible? Of course but it would be expensive and time consuming and probably littered with bugs and oversights.
0 -
"They should have thought of that before balancing the game with a ridiculously low FOV, shouldn't they?"
Hate to break this to you, but they probably DID consider it. They don't just arbitrarily pick a FOV setting. Game dev is all testing and iteration. You try this, it doesn't work, you try something else, doesn't work. Keep learning from your mistakes. Eventually you find something that works.
You seem to be under the impression they just picked 87 and that was it. No dude, they probably tried other FOV settings and found 87 to be the balance point. Hence why you have a perk that increases FOV, because it gives you a massive advantage but at the cost of a perk slot.
Just accept that higher FOV breaks the game and that it's inherent to the design. It needs to be a specific amount for a reason, they didn't just pick that number.
1 -
I dont really understand your argument. Shadowborn increasing FOV was made soley to give the killer more info as that is what its designed to do. it was never a band aid fix. Perks are designed to give certain advantages and It was widely used on some killers in the past namely Nurse but not so much with others as it didnt gain them more over other perks.
The point thesuicidefox was making is that if they balanced the game around the best possible FOV view then those that play at default have to then be disadvantaged. This in turn makes the highest possible FOV the go to one to use as its the most balanced state you can play. That is just common sense and the same reason why players gravitate to certain builds it would mean there would be a meta FOV setting.
I understand your motion sickness issue but at the same time you have to understand why something isnt an option. Its not personal or about band aid fixes its just about making it a level playing field without tweaking the system to gain an in game advantage.
2 -
No you don't have to accept any of those things because they can all be addressed without gutting the game's core design.
FOV however is not even close to the same issue as these. It can't be changed. A mod told you exactly why. It sucks but there is no alternative, there just isn't.
2 -
"The point thesuicidefox was making is that if they balanced the game around the best possible FOV view then those that play at default have to then be disadvantaged. This in turn makes the highest possible FOV the go to one to use as its the most balanced state you can play. That is just common sense and the same reason why players gravitate to certain builds it would mean there would be a meta FOV setting."
Quoted for truth. Highlighted for emphasis.
Asking for a wider FOV in a game where it is a critical balance aspect is selfish, no other way to put it. Sucks that you get motion sickness, but that doesn't mean they need to make the roller coaster worse for you to enjoy it. Some things are just not meant to be. Game design is not haphazardly done. There is intent in everything.
1 -
I still dont see how the FOV setting is a band aid fix when it is shown that an increased one gives more of an advantage. It seems your personal issue is more the problem than the setting as most players dont have any issue at all. While some would like it most are probably due to knowing it gives an advanatage so its about personal gain that what is best overall.
The music is another issue as sound is just as important as sight on this game. Anything that allows you to adjust the sound then has the inherent problem of giving an advantage. The obvious solution as sounds could be lowered when in a chase which allows the music to be lowered but that then may not allow you to hear someone coming up behind you as easily.
The game is designed how it is, it seem you think its due to using band aid fixes but its simply about making it a level playing field as players will always use system settings to gain a better advantage. Its exactly why they had to change some of the setting on low more recently.
This goes back to the old days of GS:go and why the vets use low setting or even COD 1 for those that had a good card on PC you just unlocked your FPS to be at 333 then you could jump further.
DBD was designed so certain things cannot be adjusted for an in game advantage. Allowing this to happen would casuse so many balancing issues that a "best adjustment" setting would appear and they would become the default ones used by the masses. what then has changed? what if some dont like the new FOV or sound settings?
0 -
"And that's what I don't understand. I don't see how it could be that hard to balance around a comfortable FOV from the start, instead of an uncomfortable one from the start."
"If I was making a game and I had a choice that I could balance the game, but it would cause a small fraction of players discomfort -- I would immediately look to find another solution."
You answered your own question.
First it makes no sense to dump what is essentially the best balance point to satisfy a small fraction of players. You are basically changing the core design of the game to accommodate a handful of players.
Second, there likely is no other solution, at least not one that doesn't drastically change how the game is played. You keep talking like there was another option. No dude, there probably wasn't. Like I said game dev is testing and iteration. The devs likely tried MANY different FOV and found 87 to be the one where the game just works the best. No to mention, some people do get more motion sick with higher FOV, so you're never going to satisfy everyone.
I have a friend, no lie, that gets seriously motion sick from ANY first person game. Even when he can change the FOV, he is just a guy that easily gets motion sick. Know what he does? He avoids playing first person games. He doesn't go to the developers and complain there is no third person option. In a game like Minecraft where you are not hurting the core design or directly affecting other players, sure they can give you a third person option. But in COD, they won't give you a third person option BECAUSE IT BREAKS THE GAME! I really don't see how you cannot comprehend this. As @twistedmonkey said it's just common sense.
Also your whole comparison between game design and cement just shows you don't understand how game dev actually works. Sometimes there is only 1 way to pour the cement that works with the rest of the design. If you want to pour it a different way, you have to change the fundamental design of the thing you are building. Might as well make an entirely different whatever it is you are making while you are at it.
It's like the 500lb dude complaining that there is a weight capacity limit on a roller coaster. No sir, you can't ride because of weight limits. AND THERE IS NOTHING THAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT IT. That's just how it works. Sad fact of life. End of story.
1
