Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Their data showed some huge amount of the player based liked it is why. I doubt they care if they had to just never run it again.
(They originally released stats that 40% of all matches played were 2v8, considering the player discrepancy it which ends up being ~57% of the entire game was on it even when it had 0 incentives and 4 killers).
That combined with the 50% concurrent player base increase and all the spending it brings, that starts to incentivize it hard.
Granted, if they kept the 2v6 I would 100% not care if they never brought it back.
Define: Casual player? And what is the alternate to it? Are you inferring perhaps there is a pro-comp or expert player who knows best and better? If so based then upon what criteria do we decide who is such a player? Are you maybe using the big streamer format of: "you need to have 10,000 hours before you should be allowed to speak on anything, they espouse on?"
Typical players are the heart and numbers of the game. And anyone with 500 hours, is far above and beyond average total play times. So, if the long term wannabe a pro-level e-sport player types, keep on grossly overplaying and smerfing about, they will ruin the game for the "casual player" core and majority. That then includes the new and fun minded ones. I
This sort of "Elite"heirarchy nonsense, tends to be what starts the down spiral for many failed online games. More so when they are not controlled, and capped. They tend to be the ones who deny mismatch, and think things like smerf accounts, re-shaders, screen stretchers, and high VPN ping, make them clever, where others just call them cheats.
More so in DbD, which is a fan casual game in heart and intent and not a pro-comp e-sport akin to Team Fortress or C.o.D. Which notably is where many of the big DbD smerfs came from, when they could not hack it there, and made those communities toxic. But i digress.
What confuses me more is that they threw that out there then essentially said they want to have bots, which is more casual. Either the player skill is so low bots seem mildly useful, or it's high enough the bots instantly fall apart failing to handle meta/strategy/etc...
Having played as and vs Legion a bunch, the extra large terror radius is both good and bad... it's tough to tell distance based on it sometimes so you end up wasting power running after someone you're way too far away from, and then if your partner brought Shadow you're screwed anyway... but it's also a pain on the survivor side when your location is just constantly being broadcast, so a lot of people aren't going for unhooks or doing gens because of it.
Wesker really didn't need that third dash. Everyone else basically got some cooldown / windup / move speed tweaks, but actually adding a third dash to his kit in addition? Makes it nearly impossible to outplay him, especially with how garbage the servers are and how ridiculous his dash hitbox already is.
I think the problem is that survivor bots are coded to play to “survive,” and that’s about it. They can be useful at (usually very slowly and with mistakes) finishing gens if you happen to find yourself in a lobby where no one else but you and the bot someone left wants to touch gens-but the second they pick up the hint of a terror radius-they flee-regardless of context. A gen could be 99%-ed and they will leave it even if they could finish it before the killer has a chance to grab/attack them. They also will refuse to heal after a save unless it’s directly under hook frequently. They will sandbag/run straight to the exits and refuse to save live survivors if they’re hooked even if there’s a 90% chance they could save w/o it costing them the win.
Casual players/new players often make the mistake of being overly altruistic/saving at the wrong time/not getting away from the killer fast enough and ending up a early hard-tunneling casualty.
The bots meanwhile, often play like so-called “immersive survivors” A.K.A. rats, or they do absolutely nothing useful. I’ve seen more than one bot with AFK crows. Unless they’ve been slugged for too long (that’s not been the case in my experience with AFK crow bots) that should straight up not be happening. I’ve spectated a bot crouch so long under a hook after being saved that they got AFK crows. They didn’t start moving until the killer came after them (that was in 1v4).
I’d guess the problem of bots being overly skittish over terror radiuses (and therefore refusing to be useful to other players frequently) is only amplified by A LOT in 2v8-because in 2v8 there’s double the killers-so double the terror radiuses.
TL;DR: In regards to 2v8, I’d rather have a new player who’s at least trying to help (even if they do so poorly) than code that plays selfishly or uselessly more often than not.
Also for the bot situation, i've seen many of bots in my games that have been either body blocking when anyone's in a chase, hiding in locker rooms rather then doing gens, leaving as soon as someone opens the gates, or taking up all the health packs, they gotta fix it immediately.