http://dbd.game/killswitch
Dustin and Eleven as Survivors is wrong.
I think it's a bad choice to add characters that are represented as children in 4 out of the 5 seasons. For the most part they are recognised as children characters and even in season 5 they are both 16. Yes they aged up characters before but that does not mean it's something they should do - it's a compromise that has varying effects depending on the character. It worked fine for steve and nancy in my opinion, they both have jobs in season 2 and 3. They face horrors early on, similar to laurie and quentin.
Worst thing to happen to dustin is being a victim of bullies. Eleven gets hunted but she has plot armour. I don't think it's right to show these characters being killed, it's never going to happen on the show. Well we dont even know what's gonna happen on the show for all we know these characters dont survive and they have to make a dbd canon similar to Yoichi who turned out poorly imo
If they dress up these characters in outfits they wore years its gonna look and feel weird
Hopper is the ideal choice for a stranger things survivor and choosing anything else is lowering their standards. Thats why if they couldn't do it they shouldn't do a survivor imho.
Robin also would have been a good survivor, but instead she is definitely going to be a legendary for Eleven which is an arrangement i am not happy with. Same with Eddie, i don't think he could have been a survivor, definitely a legendary, but on dustin is also an arrangement i don't like.
All of this leads to my ultimate problem with the game is them promising variety but not everything is as solid or fits in the game in the same way. When stuff like this gets added because they feel obligated to and not because they want to or have a vision for it.
Maybe i am wrong and they have a vision for these characters and survivors and present them in a new and cool way with interesting lore good visuals and cosmetics but i am doubtful given dbd's past and i speculate that this is just adding to the bloat
Comments
-
Yeah, it's a weird choice for them to choose the kids.
Hopper and Joyce are right there.
14 -
Yeah that's how i feel.
I'm a bit conflicted on Joyce because similar to the kids she also doesn't really ever get harmed however that would be an opportunity to make it scary.
Doing the same thing with the children just makes me uncomfortable… like MCote has said before "We don't kill kids" but they are willing to add characters that are 16 yrs old?
My first impressions are sour because of this0 -
Could've picked Murray. Or just made Robin and Eddie full Survivors instead of skins.
1 -
You have to also take two things into account.
1. It's not entirely up to BHVR alone. Netflix could have been the ones to say they want Dustin and Eleven.
2. If we are to get Hopper and Joyce, would you necessarily want a knock-off Joyce like we got for Ellen Ripley? I don't know the full details of Netflix's contract, but there might be something in Winona Ryder's contract that they would have to license her likeness from her. Note that no other game that has done collaborations has had Joyce either, not even those that had Hopper and all the kids.9 -
Just weird that they chose characters that we've never seen over the age of 16 when there was a plethora of other options.
3 -
I would have liked Hopper
On the other side of things I am now required to main the new character.
I don't mind if they were kids in the show as long as they're depicted as adults in the game.
4 -
There are plenty of Horror and horror games of kids getting killed plus they are 16 years old now and that's legal adult age in many places I don't see why this is a big deal if they were still 13 and under then i would have agreed they shouldn't be in dbd but this is just a nothing burger to complain about.
1 -
not idea why such a drama about them being kids in the game…. its a game. if your relating it to real life and its wrong to kill kids then shouldnt this apply to the adults too? its all wrong but its a game. "i dont like the idea of kids being harmed in the game" but they are ok with men and women being harmed in the game?
4 -
True Horror is that nobody is safe no matter the Race, Age, Sexuality and etc
4 -
name ONE
0 -
google it lol there are a fair few
1 -
They're not kids. Holly is a kid.
2 -
I’m sure it will be the adult forms just like Fortnite. You all get pressed for no reason
2 -
There's to many in horror movies alone to count in video games though Bioshock, Cry of fear, days gone, Dead Space, Clock tower, and that's not even adding the indie horror games.
Heck there's even games that aren't horror related that lets you kill kids like Deus Ex
3 -
Not that I agree with this choice myself, but didn't they do something similar with Cheryl from silent Hill?
Iirc she's like 16 in the original game but they intentionally "aged her" to 18 in the DbD lore to avoid exactly this problem.
5 -
Netflix gets what netflix wants. They probably are the more popular characters. I'm not sure as i've never watched stranger things or gotten into any of the stuff about it. Given that they already lost the ST license for demo a while back they probably want to make super sure netflix is happy this time around.
1 -
16 is a child.
2 -
The characters people have asked the most for are Hopper, Eddie and Robin.
we all assumed the kids were off the table, apparently not though.
Unsure of why age is an issue now. BHVR can just age up anyone.
0 -
age of consent is 16 in uk…. so can kids have intercourse based on 16 is still a child?
-5 -
16 is considered legal adult in a lot of places especially the UK heck in Germany you can drink beer at 16
3 -
Yeah they did idk why it's a problem when stranger things do it
0 -
It is going to be weird seeing dustin get brutally murdered lol. Of all the characters hes primarily the comic relief kid.
1 -
These are, simply, likely just the actors who were keen on doing it. I wanted Joyce and Hopper but likely both Ryder and Harbour had no interest in doing it, or maybe they wanted more money than BHVR was willing to offer, or insert other reason. Netflix can't force them to do it.
1 -
Being "considered" a legal adult isn't some sort of iron clad case. There are countries where the age of consent is 12-13. Doesn't make them adults.
I'm not saying I would would make them, but I 've heard rational cases that the age of consent should be as high as 21-25.
That's a bit much, especially on the higher end, but I would absolutely consider a 16 year old to be a kid. I didn't feel that way when I was 16, but that's part of the point; most 16 year olds are kind of a hot mess.
But as far as this topic goes, it's not a huge issue, imo. Teenagers die in horror media all the time, and it's not like they're using the early season representations. I mean I wouldn't make the same choice, but I'm not appalled by it or anything.
Of course the fact that these actors are all well into their 20s (and look it) has something to do with it.
3 -
Yes.
2 -
I think the devs play the Abba song money money money on a loop when looking at new licences.
It could be a Netflix request on characters available and if they want the licence that's the conditions.
A message from devs on age of characters would be welcome.
0 -
I was shooting kids and stomping babies in Dead Space lol
4 -
It's the polar opposite of what the majority has wanted since 2019. It might be a licensing agreement, personal choice, whatever. The reality is that I think people are gonna pass on this one like I plan to (in my opinion).
-3 -
I've never seen ST, so I won't stick my opinion where it won't belong; Yoichi was my favourite character from Ringu, and he's like a 1st grader and imo his inclusion to DbD was pretty based. When it comes to licences, they usually have good taste. They have my vote of confidence from Ringu, Silent Hill and Tokyo Ghoul to make tasteful and respectful choices
0 -
If I remember correctly hag was 15-16 when she got into ream so Idk whats it is all about it looks more like personal problem of fear seeing their favorite characters getting bullyed.
If we take it more “deep” than we have twins where you can as survivor kick mutant baby and dreadge is by lore to just a baby so Idk what its all this about, there are many games where you can play as characters that arent 18 and if its problem I guess its been already solved by devs (like someone metioned something about shery above).
0 -
You can even kick a baby in DBD against twins (even if its mutant one that doesnt die its still little guy).
0 -
but people have been doing that for years with the adult survivors…. doesnt mean its supporting rapists. killers kill men and women….doesnt mean they are supporting serial killers. its game. dont like it? too violent for you? maybe dont play a horror game?
2 -
Not really a personal problem i would think that it is common sense that harming children in media is distasteful. It's not about making sense, technicalities or legality.
Victor does not bother me because it's not relatable and it's the survivors just defending themselves - there is no malicious intent against a child here.0 -
Yes teenagers die in horror but not in Stranger Things therefore i think you can make a case here that these choices are unfaithful to the license
-2 -
As I mentioned above this is probably already solved by the devs so wait a while and then rage, now you can just ask and wait (their age will be changed so its legal to beat dustin in DBD).
-1 -
I am not "raging" i am just sharing a concern. I am doing that now whilst it's on my mind, i am not denying the possibility that my opinion will chance on PTB, these are just first impressions. And again, i do not care about legality, it's not appropriate in a discussion about how a decision or choices about content makes me feel. Because even if there are laws against these things. As we've already elaborated you can just find loop holes around them by saying these character are 18 when clearly it does not feel that way.
-1 -
Common sence is nice thing but quite not taken in account in these days especialy in western part of the globe so now the legal part is more what matters, reason I write this slone is because it gets deleted by someone mistly.
-1 -
First inpression is one thing, having concern is nice but changes nothing untill we are 100% sure how its done so only in PTB we will know and those “legal” parts are quite very important than you think because the kids being in most contries people under age of 18 is the legal part that you have concern about.
Hate it,down vote it as you like or repert it but thats just cold facts.
And again we are kicking someone who looks like baby since twins chapter so by feeling it not being right is good moral concern but I dont think it will change anything when money are at the table.
0 -
The technicality of what a child is, is not important, it's simply the fact that these characters as survivors as a concept makes me uncomfortable.
It absolutely does change things when we are the customers. I am already very frustrated with the quality of… most of the content in the game right now and if the killer is mid and i dislike the survivors as much as i predict. I am probably not going to end up buying the chapter.0 -
The technacility is what matters and will go through because its legal part that makes it go through and be released, I get you dont like it but there isnt much you can do to stop it because stranger things fun base in DBD is pretty big I would say and they wanted this long time ago or something simular.
The thing is some people might look like kids or be shorter than kids but if their id is valid and they are 18+ they can buy a beer in some countries, so if they dont be under 18 then its ok legaly.
-1 -
As a person from the UK, 16 IS STILL A CHILD. If a 16 year old is taken advantage of its treated as a child being taken advantage of because that's what it is. Age of consent is the way it is so they can easily access healthcare and safety measures without being treated like a criminal. I don't care about eleven and whoever because they're going to get aged up anyway, but good god man.
1 -
um no bhvr is not legally obligated to do this, it's their decision and yes it has many factors including netflix however i disapprove of what they are doing and i want that to be known
0 -
we have twins
The devs have, at least in the past, been insanely clear and intentional that Victor is the same age as Charlotte and have shut down any reference to Victor being a "child", "baby", or "toddler".
The community may refer otherwise colloquially, but officially Victor is a thirty something adult trapped in a malformed body horror existence with his sister.
5 -
so if the age of consent is 16 which is a child then technically its legal for an adult to have intercourse with a child (someone 16) correct?
0 -
I understand it, personaly I dislike some characters getting bullyed by weaklinks like nemesis or wesker getting destroyed by meg with wooden boards and I can imagine some others characters like darth vader getting destroyed by 4 “locker dwellers” dwights with flashlight matching light saber but I cant inflence what will devs do much and if its huge potencial outcome in that thing they will push it as much as they can logicaly (Im not rude but thats pretty easy common sence, money has huge influence).
-1 -
Yeah I found it few minutes ago (hard to remember all these things especialy lores that were some changed since the 2016 DBD but some may complain this is moraly wrong which it is but on other part its just game and taking the story in victor is just some mutated baby like creature trying to kill you so I guess kicking it isnt that bad reaction.
0 -
No, because the only way that would happen was if someone was taking advantage of that child. What are you on.
0 -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_majority_(England)
0 -
how do you come to that conclusion? i personally know someone in their 30s that started dating someone who was 16…. someone wasnt happy about it and called the police. both the 16 year old and 30 somthing year old admitted to having a relationship. police actually said there is nothing they can do because 16 is the age of consent. So aslong as they consent it is perfectly legal. This is coming from police officers. If this was considered taking advantage of a child then police would have acted on it.
This is not the only case im aware of, when i was 16 i had a friend that had a relationship with a married man…. once again, the police were called and they had to say there was nothing that can be done.
-3 -
the 16 year old has to report it, in which case they are treated as a child.
0
