Respectfully, A important Question regarding royalties for the FNAF Chapter

Considering the promo image had "Copyright Scott Cawthon" on it, I'd say yes.

Which is a shame.

Giving money to someone directly supports their livelihood and further goes to establish their viewpoints

He has literally apologized because he wasn't aware of what the charity stood for. He hasn't donated to them since. You people just refuse to let people make mistakes or apologize for them.

Thank goodness FNAF is garbage.

Won't be a struggle to not buy the chapter.

BHVR can do whatever, they just shouldn't make queer acceptance part of their brand, and then work with someone who contributes to harming queer people.

Yes, he is prepared to sacrifice queer folk, because he feels the country will be better overall. He should own that instead of pretending that he supports anti-queer politicians because it's what's best for queer people in the long run.

Not that it bothers me but this sure seems like a double standards on BHVR

The simple truth is, in this modern interconnected world, that you cannot buy anything (product or service) without putting money into the pockets of someone that disagrees with you. If any of you have watched "The Good Place:" you will also understand that almost every action you take has negative consequences as well, even when you don't mean for it to do so. Sometimes when you donate to a charity you find out that hardly any of the money went to the people you thought you were helping, and a lot went to people you don't like. Sometimes you put the money directly into the hands of a homeless person thinking you bought them dinner, only to find out later you bought them booze or hard drugs and they died because of it.

The world is complex. When it comes to intellectual properties there is always someone connected that you don't know about. Likewise, some of the greatest IPs are connected to people that had questionable if not downright horrific beliefs in their personal lives. If you feel better, get a satisfaction from denying yourself access to something to deny someone else money, that is a reasonable enough reason to do it. If you are able to divest the IP from the creator, then likewise that is a perfectly respectable reason to feel comfortable enjoying that IP. For my own part, I largely do not follow nor care about the creator's of IP (even those I particularly enjoy). I don't care about the creators, only the work. I think good people are quite capable (and have) done terrible things, and that bad people have, from time to time, produced good things. With that in mind I judge the the art, not the artist.

All that being said, I could care less about Five Nights coming to Dead by Daylight. It isn't an IP I associate with horror, a fun video game, or most recently a good movie. I consider it all B-Reel material at best. It won't bother me to run from a mechanical mascot, nor will it impress me. The new arrivals will join the ranks of many other Killers that are just kind of "there:" for me. I realize this is personal opinion, but I've never understood the excitement around this IP. I won't buy it unless the Perks seem so good that I don't want to wait on the Shrine. ;)

This. They (BHVR) have a pinned message at this very moment from about almost 2 years ago that shares a unique experience and the level of impact that inclusivity has on some of us. This was right upon when they revealed David was a member of the LGBTQ+ community. Which I think many of us shared a similar experience, and celebrated this wholesome moment.

It would be rather absurd not to take notice of the baggage and controversy that comes with FNAF creator's questionable choices. It seems odd but not surprising (as a company) that BHVR would want to embrace this brand as future collaboration content. It is a shame because it sort of diminishes their efforts and backtracks on their message, even if that isn't what they mean to do.

My personal opinion is that I personally don't care about the brand itself or it's creator. Even with his apology, his reasoning sounds like a single issue voter problem without the understanding the full scope of what's at stake (I have some of those in my family). We can dissect his history and go down that rabbit hole all we want, at the end of the day we are all free to make choices, even if those choices are wrong.

There is no ethical consumption under capitalism but that doesn't mean you cannot make decisions based on the information available to you at the time, and the morals you currently have.

Idk why you argue with these people. They literally don't and never will care until it's them in the hot-seat because critical thinking and reading comprehension isn't something that can be spoonfed.

I'd just say redouble your efforts irl and you'll see that real people do care and progress is on a challenging but decent pace.

That thread has now been closed :(