ZaKzan

I see nothing wrong with jiggle physics

No. A good team will just run to the edges of the map if the nurse is chasing them. This maximizes distance to hooks and maximizes the amount of distance to the other team mates. There is absolutely no way for the nurse to win in this scenario. In fact, we have tournaments where this has already happened. The game is very…

Because games like DBD are designed to be addictive.

Survivor gameplay completely revolves around information. A large portion of survivor perks revolve around gaining information. If you are working on a gen and a fellow survivor is downed, you have to make the choice to continue working on that gen or saving the downed survivor. If you and another survivor both decide to…

Felix wasn't added solely to appease straight white males. That's the difference between a token and a genuine character.

Which is fine. What I'm saying is that there's no point to cater to a specific type of person. The fact that the game does have a diverse set of survivors means that they are quite inclusive already, so complaining that they aren't inclusive is just untrue. I don't see how making tokens is productive at all.

But that character doesn't represent them at all. This is what I've been saying. You are more than the color of your skin, or your sexuality. What is not nice is to be defined who you are by the color of your skin or sexuality. I find that quite offensive. Attempting to represent people in that way is also extremely…

So what about the LGBT people that weren't discriminated against or abused? Why can't you find room to represent those people? Do you see what a slippery slope this is, and it's rooted in just how unique every individual person is.

Your sexuality doesn't represent who you are as a unique individual. Even if they create an LGBT character, they won't represent individual LGBT people, because every human is extremely unique and that uniqueness goes far beyond their sexuality. It doesn't make sense at all. I fail to see how this is inclusive. You are…

As a straight person, I don't look at any straight character and say 'hey that is me.' My sexuality is quite possibly one of the least defining features of me. In fact, I've been gaming for about 20 years now and I have yet to find a single character that's like me. I really don't understand where you're coming from. It's…

The people that design this game have absolutely no idea how this game is played, even at a fundamental level.

If Almo was under NDA, then it would have been better for him to not even address the question altogether, or address it in another way. He could have even acknowledged the question and said that he cannot answer anything on that due to a NDA. There's a bit of an issue when it comes to censoring, moderating, deplatforming…

But the issue at hand is that one of the devs didn't seem to know that it was being worked on. I'm not saying it doesn't take time. I'm just saying that it's likely they weren't actually working on a colorblind mode and they just threw something together to appease the masses. The little evidence that we do have is one of…

When they presented the colorblind testing to that twitter account, it just looked like they spent 10 minutes in photoshop altering screenshots. Further evidence of this fact is shown by what Almo said about colorblind mode and saying along the lines that it wasn't a priority and if 'they' as in BHVR wanted the devs to do…

The average killer is a lot stronger than the average survivor. At high levels, survivors become nearly invulnerable, and even the strongest killers can only hope for a 2k. You don't really need stats to understand this. You need to just make changes that will make it easier for average skill survivors to survive, and to…

Survivors are given plenty of chances. The issue with DBD is that survivors are coddled. They aren't forced to try to win, they are very easily carried. You don't even need to interact with the killer to win more than half your games. Survivors are encouraged to be brain dead, so the vast majority of them are bad. When you…

Determining strength off of higher skill levels creates a fair playing field in which the difference between two players isn't some stupid gimmick or mechanic, but skill, effort, and dedication. As humans, we psychologically feel a loss much more acutely than a win. This is an issue with imbalanced games. You can win most…

The vast majority of survivors are so bad that it's hard to get any data from games with them. If it was 1v1, it would be a lot better, but because there's 4 survivors the odds of having one or two bad survivors in a game to swing it in the killer's favor is higher than getting 4 decent survivors. The issue is that the…

Killers are only strong if you're a bad survivor. This includes both mechanically bad and also a lack of understanding of how the survivors are a team. If you make decisions that are better for you over the team, you will lose more often than win. If you make decisions that are better for the team, you will win more than…

Just because some russian dude made a 2v8 mode in his basement doesn't mean BHVR is capable of doing it with ~600 employees. They can barely get the 1v4 mode to work properly and break it every patch.

Why would you ever jump on a gen right next to the hook that you were just unhooked from? Doctor spending all that time tunneling you means your team mates have had 180 seconds total to do gens, if the doctor waits out the 60 second DS timer. This is a losing play. Maybe you should actually try playing the game so you can…

you counter him by putting objects between you and him so that when he does hit you, you break the chain. This is how he is intended to be fought. You aren't supposed to dodge his shots, you are supposed to get hit by them, then stun him with the chain break, that's why his stun is so long and why he's a 110% killer.

There already is an anti tunnel perk in the game called decisive strike. If killers tunnel you, get better at chases. There is almost no way to catch a survivor that knows how to loop without completely losing the game. You should learn that playing as a survivor, you are not a solo player and you are a team against one…

People have the right to call out morally reprehensible or unethical behavior, though. It's pretty sad when the people who hate the game play it anyway, showing more loyalty and care for the health of the game than the devs do.

It's not terribly hard to design a UI around a small amount of information like what is needed for a game like DBD. Now for games like Crusader Kings or Stellaris where you have economies, armies, intrigue, and politics, the difficulty in designing a crisp UI increases dramatically.

Gotta give respect to get respect. This stuff isn't new with this game. The devs have deliberately chosen to ignore the playerbase and push forward with bad design choices since this game was created. You can't fault players for telling the devs that they are making their 10,000th mistake and getting frustrated when the…

you can avoid having to revert months of work if you're more transparent in your design choices and if you're planning on making significant changes to the game, you can also run it by your players before you spend months working on those changes. It's just so amazing how much bad PR they get just because they are so poor…

Old one. Hook counter for both killer and survivors Survivor icons showing who the survivor is but more readable status. The 12 hook counter is also an ok idea. No need to pay me $60,000 a year, and I don't need months to figure it out either. You're welcome BHVR.

It's the fact that so many people told them, through the feedback section of the forums, where people are told to go in order to report their feedback, that the new UI was trash, and they just ignored all that feedback and pushed it through anyway with no changes. They essentially just gave the community the middle finger…

most of the time, an issue with camping and tunneling can be traced back to your own fellow survivors, not the killer. Stop blaming the killer when your team mates don't know how to play the game and sandbag you.

They play the game, they're just not very good and they have no appetite for listening to the community or anything beyond what helps make the game more marketable. It seems they're more interested in things that can easily be pointed out in a graph and be easily explained in a presentation to show their bosses, rather…

keep in mind, for the last two months, DBD numbers have been artificially inflated on steam because it counts users if they log on, not if they play for any amount of time. So the login rewards in december, plus the bloodpoint even in January. The game got 2.8k more players when they spent millions of dollars getting ninja…

As a company with a finite amount of resources, Behaviour has to chose where to put those resources. It is very obvious from what the OP is essentially saying is that more effort and resources need to be put into game design and balance, rather than cosmetics. Meaning either hire more people, or replace them with more…

From what has been said in the past, Almo and another dev are the only ones that work on balancing. They probably have another one or two devs doing bug fixes. The other 594 employees deal with all the other issues.

This game has so many glaring issues with bugs and balance, that lesser played killers aren't a top priority. The devs do seem to spend exorbitant amounts of time changing absolutely useless and random things that we may see her changed in the future, though

DBD is a complicated game, which requires complicated data analysis to properly understand what's going on. Chase duration, kill rates, gens completed at certain breakpoints (like how many gens done by 6/12 hooks, any survivor that has reached second stage on hook counts as 2 hooks), killer skill level vs individual…

remove perk tiers. This also has the added benefit of freeing up a lot more creativity, as with the current system, every perk has to be able to be separated into 3 perks, so the DBD team is mostly limited to percentages and incremental bonuses on perks when designing them.

if you want to play to win, and you're not playing nurse or spirit, you have to tunnel and camp. There is absolutely no way around that, especially when you go up against good survivors.

You aren't getting hit with DS every 5 seconds. The 4 dses is the span of the entire game. If you are getting hit by 4 dses, even in short succession, you are not winning the game. Period. If it takes you 10-20 seconds to down the survivor, then it takes you another 20 seconds to down them after you get hit with DS, and if…

When you play killer at high ranks, you get a hodgepodge of very good and very bad survivors. This shouldn't be the case. The ranking system, especially on the survivor side, inflates their skill. As a survivor, you don't have to interact with the killer to get points and rank up. As a killer you HAVE to interact with ALL…

If you are taking 60 seconds to chase unhooked survivors down, you are losing the game. If you are getting hit with 4 dses, you are not winning the game. If you are getting hit with 4 dses and still winning, you are not playing the game at a high level against even mildly decent survivors. The fact that you somehow can't…

Which actually is a thing on DBD, since the player retention in this game is very poor. Scott actually made a video recently on this. But basing game balance on bad play is a poor way to balance any game. Counting on players to be bad is actually why it's so painful to play as a solo survivor on this game, and it's why…

The video elucidates DS' ability to be used offensively. You can pick apart every tiny millisecond of video and every minor mistake the killer made, but it doesn't change that fact. You're right, my calculations don't tell the whole story, as I've left out the time it takes to down the survivor in the first place, which…

Except DS isn't just a 5 second stun. Even if the gamestate is favorable to eat the stun, if the survivor runs in a straight line, it takes the killer about 23 seconds to catch up to the survivor, so it's not a 5 second stun, it's more like a 28 second stun. If the current conditions are unfavorable to eat a stun, like the…

for the first 3 tries, the chance to get out is lower than what it is now. So survivors are less likely to get out in the beginning, but more likely towards the end. Right now survivors have about a 25% chance per attempt to get out, with the change, for the first 3 tries, they will have about a 16% chance to get out.…

you dont need to use his other bottles, he's still getting a 2 second reduction in his reload, and his addons have been tuned. He gains speed with his antidote, which means if you can't think of a way to utilize them against survivors, you can always just use them to traverse the map, and with his buffed reload, he is able…

Yeah, I don't think I agree with the blinking light on injured survivors. Actually if it was just a solid red, and not blinking, it would probably be better for me. Although I do recognize that this change just screws over colorblind people more, so even though the change I suggested would be good for me, it wouldn't be…

DBD is an asymmetric game, which is, by definition, unfair and unbalanced as it is a team of four survivors versus one killer. There are many unbalanced features to this game beyond that, you brought them up in your post. Just because you don't think it's unbalanced doesn't make it true. Since all the map tiles are…

So you're saying having abusable exploits / bugs / unintended interactions are ok as long as they're relatively rare?

if you play survivor, you have to realize that you are a team. You ran a spirit for 4 gens and you made the killer lose the game by only getting 1 kill. If you want to escape more often as survivor, you need to be selfish and sacrifice your team and then take the hatch.