Licensed Survivors (choosing a representative)
CONTEXT:
I wrote this as a youtube comment, and it went on for long enough that I figure I should probably post it on the forums. It was in response to a recent video that was talking about the criticism of Quentin Smith's addition instead of Nancy Holbrook, and how Quentin is actually a great character. I took that premise and expanded it a little bit outside of just Quentin, and commenting on how the community / devs should really be going about picking future survivors (the question doesn't translate as easily in terms of killers). I've copied it more or less verbatim and pasted it here.
Wasn't sure where to put this one since it's not one of my usual polls, it could maybe fit into lore, maybe off-topic, I just decided to stick it in general. It's long, so if you're not a fan of reading you might just wanna skip this thread.
Basis / premise
When it comes to potential / future licenses I think too often people gravitate toward the lead role as the survivor pick simply because they're the main character of the film. It's a mindless thought process that doesn't take into account their actual depth and value as characters. Which is to say: some main characters can inevitably end up being shallow and worthless, simply uninteresting, and like any other character they are equally susceptible to being poorly written, or even just flat out bland.
On the other hand, in the same way you can have the vice versa be true: supporting characters can equally be presented with opportunities to be multidimensional, always engaging within the story / pushing the narrative forward, and filled with a rich personality and backstory which makes them likable and always interesting to watch on screen.
(LOOSELY RELATED ANALOGY / TANGENT)
One of the best examples of this, though it isn't horror, is Pirates of the Caribbean and the Curse of the Black Pearl. The main character of this film IS Will Turner, he is the one who is driven to attempt to rescue Elizabeth Swan, his blood is what's required to break the curse (the curse which creates the central conflict of the story), and in the end it's Will who experiences the most growth throughout the film as he learns to accept the knowledge that Pirates (morally unbound people that make questionable decisions) can still be good men, and that the people who we naturally think of as good men (in this case the navy and their ranking officers) aren't always.
Yet despite this, the franchise undoubtedly became defined by Johnny Depp's performance as Jack Sparrow, who was originally written as a much smaller comic-relief supporting character before Depp himself influenced the direction of the character. The franchise became utterly synonymous with Depp's iconic portrayal of the eccentric and flamboyant Captain Jack Sparrow and it was this supporting character that would go on to define what Pirates of the Caribbean was to an audience. An example where the supporting character, would go on to have a greater impact on the film than the leads Keira Knightley and Orlando Bloom.
EDIT: This isn't to say that Will Turner is a bad or poorly written protagonist, because he's not and he very much is a likable and motivated (if a bit naive) protagonist. The only problem is that he more or less became overshadowed as far as media coverage goes because of Johnny Depp's absolutely stellar performance. A great character, overshadowed by a greater character (which just goes to show the quality of the writing and acting for the first film).
Picking the right survivor from a license
Too often do DBD players think that being the lead character is synonymous with being the right choice for the game. When in reality it should be the quality of the character, and how their personality and story fits within the frame of Dead By Daylight. To extend this thought process, how a character contributes to Dead By Daylight's story in ways that haven't been done before. This is how the game continues to be fresh, by expanding in new areas, genres (of horror), and elements of storytelling that progress the story of Dead By Daylight in innovative and entertaining ways.
If you decide to add what is essentially the same kind of character archetype over and over in DBD, the story will start to feel stale and begin to stagnate. For example, the military / law enforcement archetypes are arguably the most exhausted characters so far: We already have the Grizzled War Veteran (Bill), The Rookie Cop (Leon), The Obsessed Detective (David Tapp), and the Special Agent (Jill).
Increasing more characters in this vein will only continue to dry up this particular well of stories (if it hasn't already). Yet people still want to see characters like Sheriff Hopper from Stranger Things, or Deputy Dewey Riley from Scream. While I myself love these two particular characters as much as anyone, do they push Dead By Daylight in new and interesting ways that augment and enrich the story? At best, perhaps in the small novel yet ultimately limited ways that result from their personality, and at worst, not at all.
EDIT / DISCLAIMER: I am not commenting on the likelihood of different licensed characters, and recognize that because their respective properties are in some form or another already involved in Dead By Daylight, their chances are considerably reduced (as of now, although it's important to note the popularity of the idea of "sequels" / "part two" . extensions of existing chapter licenses is gaining increased traction). The characters I mention are for the sake of example, and I am ignoring the particulars of each individual characters chances / the state of their license overall and in relation to DBD.
Another example would be the investigator archetype: covered by Nancy Wheeler (the aspiring journalist), Zarina Kassir (the documentarian), and Elodie Rakoto (the occult investigator). Arguably it's more important to be careful with this category of character because these characters share many more traits among them and similarities between them than the law enforcement types, their innate curiosity always boils down to that same indispensable need to follow leads where others don't have the courage to do so and satisfy the urge to "uncover truth and secure justice."
Yet again, characters like Investigative Reporter Miles Upshur from Outlast or Private Eye Edward Pierce are still in some sorts of demand. (Okay not really the latter, but I wanted to mention the independent private eye archetype as another version of the investigator which I could see potentially making its way in DBD).
As cool as these characters might be, the new ground that they do break would be woefully little compared to entirely unique character designs and archetypes that are fresh and trailblazing. For example the newest Mikaela Reid the Young Mystic who might be equated to gypsy or fortune teller type characters who seem to have unnatural insight or strange powers (putting whether or not they have any real magical ability into question and under scrutiny) (but to clarify I haven't read her lore yet [don't spoil it for me pl0x]).
So am I saying all this just because I want to shift attention away from a potential Sydney Prescott paragraph as a Scream rep. to a potential Randy Meeks paragraph? Maybe.
It's also true that it would be incredibly creative and original to add a Horror Film Fanatic / Geek like Randy who has previous knowledge of horror icons like Freddy / Myers, must go up against them when that fictional threat becomes real and he must survive their onslaught in an interesting and ironic twist. As opposed to Sydney who (although great) is at the end of the day another determined Final Girl (and we've already got Laurie Strode and Cheryl Mason. So there's that).
I don't know how I want to wrap this up, I could take the time to write a nice conclusion that neatly wraps up what I've said in a satisfying way, or I could go eat dinner.