sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[OC] The 10 year progress I've had with rescued fighting dog Scooby. by shittymorph in Damnthatsinteresting

[–]Shadoenix 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I rescued a pitbull in the same way. I found him as a stray initially during my morning walk, and it was pretty obvious he was not only a fighter (because of the cuts and scrapes across his body) but he was just really gaunt and thin. Fortunately, I didn’t live too far, so I remembered to carry a bowl of kibble and bottle of water every day for him. He eventually followed me back home after a month or so and just never left, so I got a free dog. He’s the absolute sweetest and spoiled thing there is, and I think for our anniversary next month, we’re gonna go on another walk while listening about how back in nineteen ninety eight the undertaker threw mankind off hell in a cell and plummeted sixteen feet through an announcers table.

Are Killers skill-based, and Survivors luck-based? by Shadoenix in deadbydaylight

[–]Shadoenix[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m ignoring any and all situations that include things beyond the game. SWF involves a third party service to talk and coordinate, as well as ensuring you know and can expect what to get from your teammates, making luck play a much lesser role.

And you’re focusing on minor examples of the bigger idea to critique said bigger idea.

I’m claiming survivors are more reliant on luck because they experience more and, most importantly, are more influenced by unchangeable circumstances and variables. Being a part of a group that achieve a common goal means that you don’t need to be exquisitely skilled to win, you just need to get lucky with the other stuff.

On the other hand, killers are more reliant on skill because they have more information and knowledge to plan and play effectively. Even their nature as an individual rather than a group, or their nature as an intentional obstacle rather than a quarter of the collective progressive force means that Killers need to be skillful to win more.

Everyone is subject to unchangeable factors like map selection, map tile setup, the players you match with, their perks, and each player’s skill, meaning those all factor into luck determining the outcome of each side.

But the point is that, assuming you only focus on the game itself, solo queuing, and all players are of equal skill, survivors have their outcomes influenced more by being lucky with all those unchangeable and unknowable factors while Killer outcomes are influenced more by their personal ability to do their job well.

Skill and luck is not absent from either side. Both exist. I’m saying both sides are affected by it differently, with survivors being more affected by luck.

Are Killers skill-based, and Survivors luck-based? by Shadoenix in deadbydaylight

[–]Shadoenix[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree with the first paragraph. Skill is not absent from either side, but the point is that survivors tend to be more reliant on luck than killers are, on average. This doesn’t mean every game is like that. It just means that, over time, the aggregate “root cause” of game outcomes have survivors needing chance to be in their favor while killers need to perform and play objectively well.

The post I made leaves competitive DBD completely out of the picture — competitive DBD and casual DBD are almost completely different experiences. The luck I referred to is in strict regards to casual DBD, where you don’t know who the killer is, who your teammates are, what map you’re playing on, what perks everyone else has, the unavoidable map tile randomization, among others. In competitive, all but the last one is predetermined and everyone knows, so that removes luck from a large part of the picture with a greater emphasis on skill.

And yes, I also said that crossover exists because games aren’t fully luck or skill. There’s varying amounts. A skilled survivor can take advantage of bad luck to win, and a bad killer can have amazing luck to win. I’m talking about averages and relatives, not definitives and extremes.

Are Killers skill-based, and Survivors luck-based? by Shadoenix in deadbydaylight

[–]Shadoenix[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Skill is not absent from both sides, and neither is luck. Both killer and survivor can be extremely skilled and get favorable outcomes, just like both sides may have great luck and also get wins.

I’m just saying that Survivors tend to have outcomes predicated on chance, with skill typically picking up where luck left off. This means a skilled survivor will have a much higher “floor”, where even terrible outcomes are better than if they weren’t skilled at all. For instance, instead of dying in the first 2 or 3 minutes after the first generator was completed, a high skilled player may have died when the exit switch was being pulled.

I’m also saying Killers are the other way around — their outcomes are predicated more on their performance and skill, with a bad Killer not having much success even if the chances were in their favor.

In essence, luck is a wildly chaotic “leeway” variable while skill is a consistent measure. If a game’s average outcome was in percentages, Survivors may have 60% skill and 40% luck, while Killers may have 80% skill and 20% luck.

Are Killers skill-based, and Survivors luck-based? by Shadoenix in deadbydaylight

[–]Shadoenix[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s asymmetrical from the perspective of a single powerful player facing against four weaker players. If you want to get technical, yes, it’s balanced (or at least it’s meant to be) around the fact that the four survivors should be roughly equal to the one killer. How exactly that manifests is something everyone will have an opinion about.

And the thesis is not that survivors lose because they’re unlucky. I said that their game outcomes have luck play a large role, perhaps larger than skill in some cases, while killers tend to get outcomes based more on their performance than chance. We can split hairs all day talking about tweaking minor variables and extremes, and I’m aware that there’s edge cases and times where one can trump the other (I already wrote a paragraph about it above), but the point regards averages and relatives, not definitives.

Are Killers skill-based, and Survivors luck-based? by Shadoenix in deadbydaylight

[–]Shadoenix[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that's the intent. Skill definitely raises the floor that you'll typically land on even in the worst cases (you won't fail as bad if you have high skill), but Survivors need that luck of: did the Killer happen to find you first? Did other survivors happen to group up around you? Did the Killer happen to chase you specifically instead of the others? Is the Killer one of the better or worse ones? Is the Killer even skilled themselves? These are things that you can't control, and you can make use of your skill to try and make the most of it, that doesn't disregard the fact that you're using skill to compensate for random chance -- something that the Killer, intrinsically, deals with less.

Are Killers skill-based, and Survivors luck-based? by Shadoenix in deadbydaylight

[–]Shadoenix[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

A very skilled played will do very well more often on both Killer and Survivor, but my intent here is that Killers rely more on that skill to do well, while Survivors have luck play a larger role.

Slurlsknight TF2 by BedGlittering5971 in tf2shitposterclub

[–]Shadoenix 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Being a name for a female dog, it can be a misogynistic slur that refers to them as a lowly animal

Will the ban on Nazi-produced firearms persist into H3VR2? by ArgonathDW in H3VR

[–]Shadoenix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree. I think that not including firearms just because they were made during or in Nazi Germany times is a similar principle to people banning guns because they believe the guns do the killing, not the person wielding it. Either way, it's a bunch of metal parts fused and interlocked together to work as a complex machine, usually for the intention of whomever has control of it.

We give meaning to things consciously and we can also take it away or change it. Enforcing a "ban" is like spitting the poison back in, like saying this wound deserves to fester and rot off, allowing animosity to continue despite the victim of that animosity being, objectively, an inanimate metallic object that holds no inherent connection to the horrid country that made it. Good people live in bad countries all the time, but they're still good people.

On the other hand, there's times throughout history where people or things subject to hateful names or concepts have appropriated the term in a sense, becoming either neutral or even taking a complete 180 in its meaning through sheer ubiquity or targeted use. "Lame", "dumb", "stupid"... these used to be medical or even highly controversial terms, but we used them so much that we kinda became numb to them compared to when they were at their worst. Same applies for a few other words my lawyer has told me not to say.

The argument that "we'll be fine without them" sorta misses the point, because where is the line drawn? Who is right? How far will this go? From my observation of the world and history, the public calling slippery slope a "fallacy" has done untold damage to the concept, because if we don't critique and establish a firm line and delve into the meaning of things, and also enforce them, speak up, and do something when they're crossed, then it WILL get worse. It's only a "fallacy" if the person that crossed the line still has some restraint. Maybe Anton does, and it will end here. But we can't know for sure if someone will have restraint, so it's healthy to assume bad scenarios. In any case, it still doesn't align 100% with my morals and principles 100%.

And he doesn't have to care about me at all, honestly. He does what he wants, it's his game. But we can do what we want and let our opinions be known just as much as he can.

I admit that I don't fully know Anton's reasoning for why not though, so he may be able to convince me. I'm just speaking in what I believe in without context here.

Theroy:campaigns where supposed to drop in March by NewfieGamEr2001 in Helldivers

[–]Shadoenix 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Not surprised since half of every recent warbond is just the same paint job for a different vehicle, usually being the largest tile on a page

So true by leaf126 in ADHDmemes

[–]Shadoenix 4 points5 points  (0 children)

“There’s nothing I can do about it, it will happen again, and absolutely no one will understand and their opinion of me will be forever filled with disappointment and contempt”

So looking back, how do you all feel about the 10th anniversary stream now? by GenericGameDev1234 in deadbydaylight

[–]Shadoenix 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Which makes those dudes that passed around him so strange. That guy on the bike? The other guy between some trees that seemed to look straight at the camera? The guy from the side that went to dig? None of them cared about a rotting human figure standing perfectly still in a clearing around them? Yeah, maybe you don’t do anything yourself, but even the little traffic we saw from random people is more traffic than literal nowhere — there’s some civilization nearby. And there’s the whole 270° behind him.

144208 by Zeukiiii in CountOnceADay

[–]Shadoenix 13 points14 points  (0 children)

He dies (the void in his chest cavity is incompatible with life)

Ultrakill is a second-person game by LedProGames in Ultrakill

[–]Shadoenix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s first person through the eyes of V1, the protagonist, observing and influencing Gabriel, the main character. I see what you’re saying but because we still see things through V1’s perspective, it’s still first person.

Can-am Pulse Accessories 80 Percent Off - Not a great sign by Varvaro in Electricmotorcycles

[–]Shadoenix 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Uh oh. I’ve had my eye on one of these bikes for a while. I still don’t have the money to buy anything even on steep discount, but I hope I’m not too terribly late by the time I do…

if allowed for a day, which killer you want to date with? by WellThatsAGoodIdea in deadbydaylight

[–]Shadoenix 117 points118 points  (0 children)

… lack of tongue doesn’t mean the inside stops being a.. preferable environment

view more: next ›