Why is everyone against a FNAF chapter?
I changed this because everyone is not reading it and not understanding my intent which is fine.
post below why you are against it.
Comments
-
At this point I don't want a FNaF chapter but not because I don't think it wouldn't fit, but out of spite.
52 -
Id imagine the killer would have perks related to obsession (since they always involve one person they stalk essentially), stealth perks, and/or a perk related to surprise attacks or short chases.
Survivor would mostly be gen related I think, potentially able to put up breakable doors places, and some solo play.
Gameplay based on those perks does sound interesting if they had something like that.
That's just all based on the gameplay of the games though so they could make them totally different.
I think artistically they don't fit as well honestly.
4 -
On paper, yes.
IRL the FNAF creator is super picky about his I.P. and would probably never put out a cheesy cameo in a non-related game.
4 -
Just trying to show why it would work but yeah your right
0 -
Screw FNAF, I don't want to see it in DbD because of its fans being obnoxious.
27 -
If I see one more post about FNAF, I'm gonna lose it.
If it gets in, it gets in. If it doesn't, it doesn't.
I don't care either way. I have no particularly strong feelings for, or against.
I'm just tired of seeing these discussions every single time a new chapter comes out.
^^^^
15 -
I'm not even a fan of FNAF but a lot people say it doesn't work when it probably could
1 -
This doesn't have anything to do with the new chapter
1 -
Yeah I don't want it in myself just because I hated the games (I tried the first 3 just to see if I just needed to warm up to it). Although not all fans, a lot of the fans are obnoxious about it and I just don't get the hype myself. Very mediocre gameplay. Interesting lore though.
5 -
That's true, you didn't mention the new chapter.
I am still very tired of seeing the words "FNAF" or "Springtrap" every time a new chapter comes out.
13 -
Why do people specifically mention springtrap exvlusively?
1 -
I can understand that I was just trying to show how it would fit if they ever did a chapter obviously the new chapter has nothing to do with FNAF.
0 -
If legion bunnies fit in so does fnaf
6 -
I got no clue. I guess he's just identifiable, or something.
Again, fair. I don't think it fits in as well as something like Friday the 13th, but I can admit the source material is dark.
0 -
I'll take Annabelle, Chucky, hell even the Puppet Master in place of any of the FNAF animatronics.
Spending precious license opportunities to some insignificant waddling animatronics from a cheap horror game seems pretty lackluster.
At least the ones I mentioned are iconic and pretty well-known.
NOBODY wants Freddy Fazbear in DBD.
13 -
you Cleary did not read this at all I never said I want or even like the idea of it being added I just said that it fits into dbd.
0 -
I don't see a point in reading something over and over again, this post is nothing different than the thousands of other FNaF posts and its just getting obnoxious at this point
7 -
Then why are you even here?
1 -
Same reason as every one else, to say that its not happening
8 -
The games really aren't the selling point imo. The lore is great, its like a sci-fi horror.
0 -
cool That's not what my post is about it its about why it fits into dbd not why its going to be added or the devs need it added I don't even want FNAF
0 -
And that I can understand to a degree. I honestly would like them to relaunch the series and change up the gameplay.
1 -
The next one that's coming out is like a resident evil game so that's cool.
1 -
Interesting. What's it called?
0 -
FNaF: Security Breach. The trailer just came out.
0 -
I personally wouldn't absolutely hate it or be outraged if they put FNAF in the game, even though I have personally never played it or had any interest. If it brings new players or pleases a decent proportion of current ones then I don't see a problem. For me there are just a tonne of other licensed characters I would rather see in DBD first who I think are more timeless and iconic than FNAF characters (Jason, Chucky etc).
0 -
I ignored the thread initially but now that it's been "reworked" I'll bite.
I don't want an FNAF chapter beacuse I think the FNAF franchise is dumb, stupid and only succeeded beceause it was being promoted by infantile influencers to 5-year olds who thought opening and closing doors was good gameplay.
My nephew loves this series, he was 5-years old or so at the time, but the game was atrocious to say the least. That is not "gameplay" games we were playing in the 80's had far, far better gameplay than that tripe. He loved it only because his favorite YouTube influencers were hyping it and told him to play it.
But the "gameplay" of the FNAF games is just plain terrible. The series itself is also terrible, there is nothing redeeming about it aesthetically or mechanically.
If it could die a million deaths it wouldn't be enough.
I don't want the DBD brand to be associated with dreck like this. It would make DBD a joke. Of course the 5-year olds who loved FNAF back then would like it. But the rest of us would just roll our eyes.
It would be the equivalent of including The Backyardigans in Dead by Daylight.
8 -
unless the Backyardigans involve child murder and experimentation as well as cults now this analogy really doesn't work, but aside from that you're pretty much right on the money
2 -
To me it more feels like the company is selling out to what is popular regardless of how well it can be implemented. It would make me even less confident that the company has passion for the game and more money focused
1 -
Sure, the game may have been pretty stale, ill admit that. But, imo, the redeeming factor is the story. The stigma it gets portrays it as a child's game, with child lore, buts its more than than that.
It became a lot darker as the series went on and definitely distanced itself from the persona it had been given. Most people who liked the game when they were kids are now adults, and so the games aren't as common. There are more books than games at this point.
The games really weren't that great, and will never be as good the Nintendo of old. But no-one really cares about the games anymore, and more for the lore.
0 -
Yeah I can understand that I know that my dad loves dbd and hates the idea of FNAF being added because he thinks its not scary ,and honestly I don't really want it added either because if it weren't for the lore of the game its just a Jump scare simulator. Also yeah your right if youtube wasn't a thing the game would've died at the first one so I could see why people dislike the franchise as a whole because of that.
1 -
i think it would be kinda weird since both games are played very differently and have different types of horror
maybe it could work if done well
1 -
Robbie the Rabbit is a pretty big cameo in the Silent Hill series, one of the biggest psychological horror titles out there. Fnaf on the other hand is about a bunch of animal robots that jumpscare you (at least they were the last time I played fnaf).
5 -
Not really anymore. I'd argue that it might actually be more interesting than silent hill, at least now.
I'm not gonna lecture you, but you should go read the lore. Its pretty cool.
0 -
Its not horrible lore on FNAF but more interesting than silent hill? Its far off from that game.
2 -
FNAF only appeals to the same demoraphic that enjoys Backyardigans.
I know that the two are in terms of genre and subject matter nothing alike, but I've never seen a grown man or even a teenager at the time say anything positive about this game series (other than shills in the game journalist crowd -- but that profession is a joke these days). It is something that only appealed to kids of the time being brainwashed by influencers. Same kids who watch Backyardigans.
FNAF is existentially a series that the gamer community practically unanimously views as a "kiddy" series on the level of children's shows like that. It has zero appeal to any serious gamer.
3 -
Silent hill was always boring and confusing to me.
0 -
Seems like your using confirmation bias. I could go anywhere and find adults and teens that love the game. Plus, everyone who liked FNaF when it came out is an adult now, as the game is almost a decade old.
Also, your point about being a "serious gamer" is hilarious. You're gatekeeping. Stop it.
6 -
That's fine but that doesn't mean its not well written. For example I really don't like the last of us games because I think the story and gameplay are boring but I don't think dead by daylights lore which I find more interesting is better you know what I mean?
1 -
because people keep bringing up a horror lite game being added to dbd. DBD has some of the most iconic horror icons of all time in it's catalogue. FNAF is really just a jump scare puzzle game, I tried, its as fun as a low quality game is gonna get ig, but thats about it? Theres no real horror, theres no fear. The lore is fun for the younger audience who still follows it, and mechanically Im sure they could make something work, but thematically, it really just isnt great...
6 -
Why would anyone want it?
7 -
Why do you care if people want it?
1 -
To me, silent hills lore is just too flat and convoluted. I still don't know what pyramid head is, and not in a good way.
1 -
Honestly, it is a little silly seeing people put down ideas simply because they don't like them or want them. At this point in the game, any idea could be possible. Everyone always said Pyramid Head would never work in the game, then we got a Silent Hill chapter. Everyone said Ghostface would be boring and we already had similar killers, bam he got added. The devs said we would never see non-human killers, then they added Demogorgon. Any idea is possible and the devs have basically shown that they are creative and can make an idea work. Obviously, people know that an FNAF chapter is not likely since Scott stated he isn't doing collabs right now, but to put down ideas or theories because you don't like something isn't very nice or healthy for the community, especially saying FNAF's fandom is reason enough not to have a chapter for it, when DBD has one of the worst, toxic communities on a game, and other collabs didn't attract toxic fans from their fandoms.
5 -
Maybe because it affects the game I play?
If the creators of FNAF wanted more money they would make another game and not place their IP in another companies hands.
4 -
Fair enough. But I still stand by how the game series is not anything the general gamer populace takes seriously. That's why there s so much resistance to adding it to DBD.
There will always be exceptions and of course everyone has a different opinion. But FNAF as a brand is just not something most gamers can take seriously. Even if it's become "more interesting" since then. My point is it has always been a kiddy series and always will be and no amount of retconning it after the fact will change that stigma and branding it has.
And that's why most gamers will never accept it in a game like DBD.
1 -
No, it is absolutely our right as the fanbase to discuss what we want and don't want in the game. The game owes its success to us, the paying customers, so at the very least even if we don't have control, we at the very least have a right to discuss what we want and don't want.
Using my earlier example. If BHVR theoretically said, "We are doing a Backyardians Colab!"
Are you saying we would be wrong to say we don't want this?
Because that's precisely what you're saying. The devs can make it work!
10 -
Its not really a game series anymore. It should be taken as a novella.
0 -
Robot/animatronic/machine/clockwork killer? Cool. Wasting it on a big walking teddy bear or other creatures designed to bring amusement for children (in more ways then one) and it brings a certain community? Nah.
3 -
No, I'm simply saying it isn't nice to hate on something because you don't like it or want it. FNAF is a horror game, doesn't matter who it is focused on or not. You could argue the same thing about Stranger Things that it is just a teen romantic drama and it's focused on a younger audience. I am not wrong technically by what you are saying, but does that make it a fact? No, because Stranger Things is a horror thriller, and has an adult audience and theories and lore behind it too. So was Stranger Things a bad addition? No, but you could still use your exact argument against it.
1
