Anyone else really disappointed that ghostface...
Isn’t billy loomis?
No Sidney.
No map?
Comments
-
Considering Ghostface was more than 1 person I think it's fully fitting he's not Billy
6 -
They don't have the licensing for any of that. This ghostface isn't anything to do with 'Scream' itself. They got the license for just the mask, and nothing else.
6 -
I don't care and I like the character they came up with, I too have a playful aproach some times when playing as killer
0 -
Pretty much what @ClogWench said. If you really think about it, this new character Danny Johnson being Ghostface fits with the style of the films where it's always someone different wearing the Ghostface disguise. In fact, I believe the description of the devil outfit even says "every Ghostface should have wore it". Though I do agree it would have been nice to get Sidney and a Woodsboro map, I think what the developers did was ok in my book. There's a number of nods to the films they put in there, so that's a plus.
Really, this is the interesting thing about Ghostface, there's a loophole that devlopers took advantage of. Unlike Myers, Freddy, Leatherface, etc. He's not just one guy that keeps coming back in each film, as "Ghostface" is just simply the name of the costume and mask that anyone can buy and wear to do their murdering, though in the films it's known as "Father death". So for the developers to only get the mask and Buck 120 knife, and create their own character under the guise of Ghostface, fits the style of the films perfectly. You could almost say this is Scream 5, in a sense.
0 -
The mask and the characters have different licenses
But I am indeed disappointed that we didn't get a full chapter, the Freddy rework better be good
0 -
Don't care it ain't Billy Loomis. But Sidney and a map would of been nice.
1
