Should "Going Next" Be Removed? | Dead by Daylight



Read more Dead by Daylight ➜ https://deadbydaylight.mgn.gg

#dbd #commentary #rant

ATTRIBUTION:
Video Song: Memories Of Murder by White Bat Audio
FSM Team – Lucid Dreaming

Other places to hang:
Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/themrheadache
Twitter: https://twitter.com/theMrHeadacheQ1
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@themrheadache?lang=en
Discord: https://discord.gg/cmxukckNy3

source

28 thoughts on “Should "Going Next" Be Removed? | Dead by Daylight”

  1. Lmao not me leaving a comment before watching the video again but my idea has always been that the killer can only camp out the first stage and the second doesnt have a timer to death.

    Reply
  2. I think that you can’t really compare dbd to an fps when there is no back fill; when someone gives up it messes us for the other players.

    Going next is just dcing with extra steps. 🤷🏻‍♀️

    Reply
  3. Having a DC penalty with a way to bypass it just doesn't make sense, I also don't think it's entitled to ask that people who load up the game actually play the game.

    But a surrender option does at least make it not suck as bad for those left behind because unlike the FPS games you mentioned, that all have backfill, it couldn't work in DBD so the match should just end.

    Reply
  4. I agree with you. At the end of the day people can play however they want. If they don't want to play against a 4 slow down blight or nurse then so be it. I usually stick it out anyway because I end up dying super quickly regardless because I suck at chases against those killers lol. The only time I get frustrated when someone gives up is when it seems like we have a chance at escaping still. I've encountered survivors just giving up while we have 3 gens left on maps like Ormond! That's when it gets annoying.
    I also like how you brought up the question of why exactly survivors are giving up. What is seen as fun and enjoyable for both sides? Is constantly holding m1 to mend from a good legion who knows how to pressure fun? Is facing a 4 slowdown plague fun? I noticed that for some killers the more skilled the player is the less fun it may be for survivors to face. IDK how to fix that tho.

    Reply
  5. I’m glad someone finally said this, no one should have to explain themselves for giving up some things you just don’t wanna deal with and they don’t have to. Call it entitlement call it what you want idc

    Reply
  6. I have a video of me getting face camped by a bubba on my channel. I stuck it out because i thought i was gonna get saved. Well its solo que that was my mistake. Yes because i didnt give up on hook my teammates did gens and bubba got one more with noed. 2 escaped. Well they got 15k+ bps. I got 4k bps. I dont blame anyone that gives up vs a bubba camping. Next time it happens yeah im just giving up on hook as well. Its a waste of my time

    Reply
  7. I think going next shouldnt be removed. Thered some killers I dont want to verse think like forever legion. Or versing pinhead in soloq. If they remove it people will just afk

    Reply
  8. I get a lot of nurses who bring a survivor sided map a strong build and plays as sweaty as possible as if they were on a win streak and games like those are very hard to have fun on so it never bothers when I see people give up in games like those where the game has an obvious outcome

    Reply
  9. I'm ok with people "going next" usually as long as they arent DCing. Unfortunately most people are the kind that DC right after first hit or something.

    But really, if theres like 2 people left and I know I'm not getting out, I'd much rather give the 4th survivor hatch by letting myself die on hook. Or if I'm trying to play a normal game, and I have 2 of the other 3 survivors clearly trying to farm (walking up to killer and just teabagging out in the open or whatever) then I might not want to stick around in the game for that.

    I think theres a bunch of little reasons that being allowed to let go on hook is a fine feature to leave in. My main problem when people DC is that it immediately frees up the killer to do other things (like a survivor on hook immediately dying.) If somebody even just plays stupid and gets downed 3 times in a row really quick, at least they're still using up the killers time. A simple DC wastes none of the killers time and just leaves the killer at a huge advantage, especially if the DC is at 5 gens.

    Reply
  10. I sometimes just take myself out of the game. Like, I'm super tired of going against Wesker already and I went against an extreme sweat Wesker with the best addons and full gen perks so I just removed myself.

    Everyone does that sometimes I think and I really don't care anymore if people quit. Maybe I feel annoyed for a minute or two.

    Reply
  11. Removing the DC penalty would be a double edged sword. The upside is that we wouldn't have to play against stupidly oppressive builds, the downside would possibly become that people may begins DC from games because they got hooked or got slugged (I'm still not entirely sure why people hate slugging, but can kind of understand.)

    As someone from the siege community, having people DC in the middle of a game is annoying as all hell. It can ruin a match purely because someone decided to bail.

    If a killer were to quit, that'll waste the time of any survivors that wanted to play that match, if a survivor quits then now it's a 1v3.

    I guess that is still an issue right now, but I'd imagine that it'd become more frequent. You'd be trading the amount of time it takes for someone to give up in a match for how frequently people would be giving up.

    Trust me, it would likely be much, much worse than it is now.

    Reply
  12. no. why force people to be in a match they find unfun and dont or cant want to be in? like me Vs plag, doc, and clown. i litterly cant play Vs those killers cos the screen effects hurt my eyes, and make me sick. get me out of the match asap. If people want us to "not move to next" then let us block the killers that we dont want to ever go against. Other wise, let us move next and dont fuss.

    Reply
  13. On one half I understand why people dc or kill themselves on hook, but on the other when there the first person caught and hooked at 5 gens in less then 2 mins in a match, it can completely ruin the game for the entire team, and on the killer side, I faced a bully squad that brought me to lerys as legion, and I couldn't get a single hook because they just swarmed me, I dced and I have the right to do that

    Reply
  14. I very rarely see dcs just because the survivor does not like the killer. It happened to me ONCE that someone dc'd the second they heard my terror radius music – and you know, fair enough. Most of the dc's or the grieving I get are on downs: survivor gets downed first and dcs, misplays and suicides on hook, tries to be tunneled with otr and ds and goes afk when I ignore them, match isn t going how they want so dc, and so on and so forth.

    Reply
  15. Honestly it's kinda sad, players should have fun during a match, not want to "move on" to the next game making a gamble as to if the next game is gonna be fun or not. I see the "responsible about the other side's fun" argument brought up a lot, it just feels like in DbD the fun and enjoyiment of one of the two teams during a match comes to the detriment of the opposite one.

    Reply
  16. Unless I'm going against a trickster I have never ended a match early intentionally. The reason for me ending matches early against tricksters is that the killer is incredibly annoying to face and after a completed trickster match I usually have to go off the game because I'm too annoyed and can no longer be bothered playing. Other than that I have literally never quit a match

    Reply
  17. I feel like to an extent, the true entitlement comes down to, "I'm going to make these survivors absolutely suffer. I'm going to equip four gen slowdown all Iri add ons, I'm going to tunnel out the first person I see and I'll make sure these survivors have an absolutely miserable time and they can't do anything about it because if they do and they DC or Go Next, they're an entitled horrendous human being and that's why they should get rid of Going Next", all on a game that's insanely unbalanced and unfair in a lot of circumstances already. And yes, both sides do this to each other 100%. I just can't help but clearly see the entitlement in killers, as both sides are just as guilty as each other, claiming survivors should be forced to spend time out of their day playing against you even if they don't want to. That these killers somehow deserve your time and the have the right to that time and if they disagree and leave, the survivor who left is a scumbag, or they're the entitled ones.

    Nobody can force a person to stay. Literally nobody. If they start doing that they're gonna start losing players. A lot of the DC Penalty already contributes to a lot of what people claim makes the game miserable for them. Forcing them to sit in a game they hate by not allowing them to go next at all will just make people hate this game more and more people will just stop playing.

    Reply
  18. The whole point of a video game is to have fun, so when people run very strong builds where it makes the other side not fun, don't be surprised when they dc or give up.

    Reply
  19. I was in a game yesterday and it was only me and one other survivor left. I ran the killer for 2 gens and my teammate got them both done. he finally downed me and of course slugged and ran and eventually downed the other survivor and didnt hook either of us, just let us bleed out! Now if I quit I get a dc penalty! And I think that is bullshit! Either let us leave since the game is over or let us be able to bleed ourselves out quickly and end it all. And that option should only be available if there is no one able to pick us up.

    Reply

Leave a Comment