Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on these and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
We encourage you to be as honest as possible in letting us know how you feel about the game. The information and answers provided are anonymous, not shared with any third-party, and will not be used for purposes other than survey analysis.
Access the survey HERE!
FNAF Security Breach Increases William Afton's Chances?
Since Security Breach released could this give a bigger chance that William Afton will arrive in the realm soon and if he did do you think he'd come in with a legendary skin that turns him into Burntrap?
Comments
-
The best part of not playing Survivor is that if this garbage ever does get in, I don't have to ever deal with it.
26 -
No.
16 -
how many times must we teach you this lesson old man!
On a serious note i wouldn't be against it. Kinda like the new afton look.
Just sad how much he was cut out of the game
7 -
No FNAF please.
18 -
Scraptrap could also work as a skin. There's a lot of skin potential for Afton actually.
4 -
Fnaf 1 Freddy should be the killer. Not Springtrap/William Afton. The series should be represented by its older games.
3 -
I understand that but Sprintrap is the main bad guy of the entire series he'd make more sense than Freddy since he's just another victim of Springtrap. though I could see Freddy maybe being a legendary skin
10 -
At the same time Springtrap/Afton is the actual villain, as shown in the third game, which probably counts as an older game given it's Original Trilogy.
In a sense, using Freddy would be like using Pamela Voorhees instead of Jason.
15 -
That's completely fair. Freddy has been the icon for the series. Its in the title. Also this is subjective but I believe Freddy (and the original 4 all together) have more creepier designs than Fnaf 3 Springtrap. Imagine seeing Bonnie's uncanny face in the distance while doing a gen. I'd be so for that.
3 -
it would be creepy yes Springtrap could also lean around corners since he does that to in FNAF 3 when he's at the office door
1 -
I thought I saw people crying saying the creator is right side donater and homophobic so this community doesn't want that. (saw on twitter, also don't think people should worry about his personal choices)
1 -
fnaf security breach rlly fun tho
1 -
He himself never stated anything homophobic, iirc. He donated to people that are, though.
10 -
Why is it I can't play a single horror-themed game without someone wanting to shoehorn FNAF into it?
Please, no. The DBD player base is already a toxic cesspit without dragging over the 12 year old FNAF youtube fanbase that likes the game because their fave youtuber screamed allot. 🤮
11 -
For what it’s worth, with DbD being the “hall of fame of horror”, it’s uniquely welcoming for franchises like FNaF. Maybe Monsters and Mortals as well, but that’s not nearly as big as DbD is.
7 -
ah okay
0 -
I guess, but it's exhausting to see. Even in Phasmophobia 'You should cross-over with FNAF! Add a pizzaria and make the ghost an animatronic instead! 🤪'
6 -
Eh. Lovecraft wasn’t the finest person either, yet his world has been a massive influence on horror media. Cthulu and “Old Ones” in particular remains a prevalent concept. It’s even hinted at in the Archives.
Rowling has the same type of controversy surrounding her, yet her work still enjoys a massive fandom, as does FNaF.
Seperate the art from the artist, ‘n all that.
7 -
I mean, you’re not wrong.
Still, I’m convinced if something like Silent Hill came out today, it’d see a similar type of following.
3 -
There's already a bunch of kids playing this game as it is even without FNAF
2 -
Gonna have to disagree there. The runner of a charity can be homophobic, but the donator can just donate for a good cause and not be associated with the person further. What you’re saying comes too close to cancel culture for me. It’s ultimately just a bad opinion, not someone’s entire character.
That said, in this particular instance I would say it is somewhat telling of the guy’s character. But that’s because the receiver was… a character in their own right. Let’s put it that way.
I’ll leave it there, this is getting off-topic.
13 -
I've got to say that out of all the FNAF characters - William Afton (SpringTrap) seems to be the most likely candidate (due to BHVR not putting children in the game thus far).
1 -
You’re right about the homophobia “opinion”, that was poorly worded on my end. I’m not sure what else to call it within 2 words, though.
Again, though, at some point completely ceasing any and all relationships because they hold that “opinion” becomes nothing short of them serving time in prison. It can and has completely ruined people as well.
Whether that’s deserved… If they are in positions of actual power and have influenced others’ lives negatively themselves, by all means, yes. Beyond that seems to me like people seeking retribution for the sake of it. I’m not saying that they don’t deserve repercussions, but they have lives to live as well.
To that end, What has Scott really done? I feel like it’s vilifying (again, not sure if that’s the right word) him for something he didn’t even do himself. It was iffy for sure, and he did deserve the call-out, but do we really need to go that far?
2 -
Please no. FNAF is a series I hold close to my heart (I basically grew up with the franchise), but it would not fit in DBD.
2 -
For what it's worth, the creator isn't really in charge of it now, he's stepped away following the controversy. I'm sure he's still getting royalties, but the latest game was made without his input.
Also, the argument that it's going to bring a bunch of 12 year olds over is just not true. Wasn't true when people were claiming the trickster would have the forums completely taken over by k-pop stans, won't happen with FNAF. For one, the franchise is almost a decade old, so we already have people here who were 12 and played the first 3, they're adults (as much as any of us are) for two, adding a character from FNAF won't make this game FNAF any more than it was made RE by adding the Nemesis.
Ive personally never played FNAF, as I don't enjoy jumpscares and find them a poor substitute for good horror, however from what I understand, the guy in the bunny suit is actually a rotting corpse who kills kids for the hell of it, and the other animatronics are all also dead kids who kill everyone they see at night out of rage? If that's correct it definitely fits the feel of DbD.
In the end, I just want more. More maps, more killers, even more survivors. I don't care where they come from, so long as they are interesting and fun to play. You could give me Barney as a killer, so long as the big purple freak chomps off heads as a Mori, I'm on board to give it a try at least. Haunted looking run-down chuck-e-cheese ripoff for a map? Sounds fun to me. Either use FNAF or the movie Nick cage is starring in.
7 -
I think its even worse, you help promote those views AND you get to keep face unless someone digs it and exposes you.
4 -
God, repeated posts like this make hate FNAF, even if i've never play it.
2 -
You prefer maybe one of the 20 threads about bubba's mask, 10 about noed or 8 about Dead Hard? Or the 50 about camping/tunneling? This is the first FNAF thread I've seen in months, personally I'm happy for the change.
6 -
True. And at the same time he donated to the Trevor project and other pro-lgbt charities. So it seems he decided that while he's not personally homophobic, he's fine with people who are, so long as they help him pay less in taxes. (I.e. Typical wealthy bullshit)
4 -
He didn't donate to those people because they were homephobic. He donated to those people for other reasons and they just happened to be homophobic. Especially in america where there are like 2 choices for president you don't really have a choice. They are going to do things you agree with and things you don't. You can't pick and choose politicians like that. All you can do is go with the one who you most agree with and live with the things you don't agree with.
Will you not support what you agree with cause the other person has something you don't agree with? Cause if you do that you might as well not support anything at all. Am I transphobic cause I watched the certain movies in the movie theatre when i was a kid and the auther turned out to be transphobic later? I also supported them by watching their movies. Am i racist cause i enjoy reading H.P. Lovecraft? He was seen as overly racist in a time where racism was the norm.
People aren't black and white like that. If you cut away every person who has a bad trait then you will have nothing left.
He donated 50000 dollars to the trevor project, an lgbtq charity btw, donated over 250000 dollar to St. Jude's Children's Research Hospital and all that has been swept under the rug cause he donated 2000 dollars to politicians with 100ths of ideas which a couple happen to be homophobic.
Homophobia is a terrible thing. But throwing those accutations at people without knowing anything about them is equally terrible. It is very telling of your character to how you judge someone so swiftly while knowing nothing about them but rumors.
Cause he supported a person who happens to be homophobic doesn't mean he is. That logic is flawed beyond belief. I advice you to take a moment to rethink what your idea of right and wrong is. Cause if a person that donated over half a million of dollars to charity most of which is giving children a chance at life can be labeled as a bad person so easilly then no person is good.
8 -
FNAF is kinda cringe,especially the fanbase,don't know if it really fits into the game.
3 -
Trump's not homophobic though...
2 -
With all due respect, I personally doubt that, actually.
Besides, Trump’s not the only one he donated to.
As for the shift in topic, I had a post typed out, but then my log-in timed out and now it’s gone. Cba to type all that out again. Here’s the second part:
To use [ImmersedNurse’s] words, I think, when it comes to Scott, he was complicit to the donations’ receivers’ prejudices. I personally don’t think that equals him actually being homophobic. Should it be called out? Absolutely. But the reaction he got was disproportionate, in my opinion. That’s my point.
I should clarify that I’m really struggling to express myself here. If I offended anyone, I apologise.
3 -
We don't really need a long drawn out political thing here, but that's a fairly simple accounting of his biggest anti-lgbt moves while in office.
4 -
Not really, because people are not one-dimensional.
If I wanted to donate to someone because they, for example, built homes for the homeless and funded soup kitchens to feed the homeless. And that person is also a homophobe; does that make me homophobic? And why?
That's what pisses me off; Scott came out and said soemthing to the effect of 'I did not donate BECAUSE of their bigoted views, but because of other policies they had'. But everyone just frotched at the mouth and declared him unclean.
And I do get it, in some ways; LGBTQ+ people felt betrayed. They paid money for a game that, due to some of Scott's donations, SUPPORTED LGBTQ+ rights (which people seem to forget to demonize him). So they feel their money went to him, and from him, to politicians openly lobbying to dehumanize LGBTQ+ people. So they felt betrayed.
But people tend to forget that, aside from the defeated former president Dump; most human beings are not 1-dimensional cartoons. It's entirely possible to support one or two things someone does, while decrying something else they do.
But everyone wanted to jump on the SCOTT IS ANTI-RIGHTS train ASAP and demonize him, completely ignoring donations he has made to pro-LGBTQ+ groups before all this came out.
5 -
Yes i prefer them, how did you know ?
1 -
Which is the other reason (overexposure and it being overhyped for a crappy jump scare franchise being the other) this would be a terrible crossover.
There's no way to avoid making it a political statement. One that, supposedly, goes very against BHVR's own expressed opinions.
3 -
If anything it lowers the chances , that game is super underwhelming but visually gorgeous. Funny how the map bot is the only "scary" jumpscare.
1 -
I think if anything from this franchise ever gets in, it will be the title character and not the villain from the 3rd game or whatever. You need to generate buzz among the people who don't care about this franchise.
1 -
So you're saying that, even though I've supported gay friends, and I'm supporting and helping a trans friend, and I literally give 0 craps about someone's gender, will always used preferred pronouns (unless I forget; I have memory problems from a rough childhood), and don't care who kisses who, as long as it's consensual; If I donate to someone for their charity work, but they have anti-LGBTQ+ views; I'm phobic. Because you say so.
You're trying to attack people you don't need to attack because you want to vilify people. You want to reduce them to 'You did <x>, and nothing else matters, because I said so'.
(For the record; Everything I listed I do is true, other than the 'supporting politicians' part. I can barely feed myself; why would I give any money to a rich schmuck with 3 houses?)
8 -
nah if there were to be a fnaf killer it would 100% be william since if he wasnt a thing the older games wouldnt make sense to exist.
0 -
So, I do absolutely hate fnaf.
But, I will say this.
I think William Afton from SECURITY BREACH has a significantly higher chance of being entered than the Springtrap we mostly know.
The reasons why I say this is that he has a much cleaner and more gruesome look that actually has a walking animation as well.
Sure old Springtrap is easily recognizable, but this Springtrap is much more welcoming and terrifying. Plus, his story in addition to all the others would add up perfectly to have a decent backstory with a beginning and ending.
Edit: I forgot to mention this. I would be okay if they add this William Afton because I'm a big fan of their design.
1 -
I was not pull the 'gay friend' card, but as you cannot read my mind, you can't actually see how little I care about someone's gender, race, or orientation. Folks just need to be happy and, as Betty White put it 'I don't know how people can get so anti-something. Mind your own business, take care of your affairs, and don't worry about other people so much'
And I gave a hypothetical to understand your stance better. Because I could not use myself as an actual example, as I did not fit the question I wanted to ask. That's kind of how discussions work.
You're right in that there are better charities to donate too. But all I'm saying is that you don't need to promptly throw someone into the 'enemy camp' because they donated to someone based on ONE aspect of that person.
Let me try to make it clearer. Apologies; I am bad at communicating:
If there was some form of...what's the word? Something only a politician could do...some form of SOMETHING (but I can't remember the damn word!)
Let's say...Mr. Schmuck was FOR raising minimum wage by $3. And I agreed with that. Should I NOT donate to him because he's anti-LGBTQ+? yes; him being anti-gay is horrible. No, I would NEVER donate to him in any other capacity. But if donating to him to help him campaign to raise minimum wage was the only way to raise minimum wage...What should I do?
Because the options are now 'People can't feed themselves' or 'He's anti-LGBTQ+'. Both are damn good reasons to donate/not to donate. And would wanting him to raise minimum wage make me anti-LGBTQ+? THAT is what I mean by 'you can't attack someone based on ONE aspect'
9 -
I usually agree with you, but I think you're a bit off the mark here. I mean, it was a fun example, but not really representative of anything.
Fact is, when you give money to a political candidate, you are doing so to support their platform. If that platform consists of some things you like, and others you don't, then you are saying that the stuff you don't like Is worth it to get what you do like.
In the real world example of Scott, he gave money to multiple anti-lgbtqtia politicians, people who are actively and openly involved in trying to roll back human rights for people who aren't cisgender and straight. Now, he says he did that because of their economic plans, but frankly, those plans are just giving people who have his amount of money a tax break, so he's really saying he donated to them to try and pay less money later.
Does this make him a homophobe? No. But I would argue it definitely shows he's fine with people who aren't him losing rights, just so long as he pays less money in taxes. This isn't like giving money to a charity only to find out the CEO had some bigoted ideas, these are public political platforms.
If a politician says "I support low taxes for the rich, keeping children from learning about gay people, and kicking transgender people out of the military" over and over, in public, on camera, and even puts it in writing on their website, then it is reasonable to assume that someone who then donates to that politician is doing so because they, at the very least, support those repeatedly stated platform ideals.
Shorter version. If a politician says he'll give everyone 10,000 dollars, and also that he'll stop gay people from being allowed in the military, voting/donating to for him means that you don't care if gay people can serve, just as long as you get your 10G
5 -
Fair enough. I respect that stance. I even said I can kind of understand that in my original post; How LGBTQ+ people could feel betrayed, and feel like their money went to an anti-LGBTQ+ politician when they bought FNAF, since the developer supported said politicians. :)
I just wanted to understand the stance even better, and talking about something can help both sides realize things they may not have known before talking it out. It's...easy to get set in stone, when one can think 'This is how <x> works', and not realize there's nuance, know what I mean?
As an autistic; I run into that line of thinking ALLOT in myself, so I try to think up scenarios in discussions that force people (myself included) to think outside our, personal, set ideas.
4 -
Also very fair. See above post as well. :) (This did not alert me that you had replied until after I replied to ImmersedNurse).
Perfectly respectable points.
4 -
Always a pleasure talking to you 🙂
0 -
Damn, is this massive argument actually gonna peacefully?
3 -
FNAF is just a license that simply doesn't fit. You won't even get a FNAF killer. You'll just get a sad attempt and making FNAF in DBD instead of you know, the whole point of those chapters? The point is to add the characters. Not the entire franchise. This was the crucial mistake and what led to the failure that was Nemesis. Hadnothing to do with him but was just diet RE.
1 -
I've never played fnaf so I'm not qualified to comment
I enjoy Trickster and Legion so meh, I'm fairly open minded.
Isnt fnaf out of Scott's hands these days?
2
