Would people care about modern Licenses?

HaunterofShadows

Hypothetically, if dbd ran out of old-school licenses (anything before 2010), and they started releasing more new things in the game, would people be interested in buying them.

So things like the new Thanksgiving movie, Last Voyage of the Demeter, Antlers, The Boogeyman, M3gan, Terrifier, Malignant, A Quiet Place or anything else more recent.

Personally, I'd enjoy chapters based on recent movies and franchises as long as I enjoyed the movie.

Alice_pbg

@Caiman said:

https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3651373#Comment_3651373

The Ring began as a novel from 1991 and a movie adaptation from 1998. We have had two and a half decades for The Ring to cement itself as a horror icon. People remember The Ring, because it was worth remembering. Movies released less than 1 year ago are not comparable, because there has been no time to prove they are iconic of the genre, or of anything at all, or if anyone will even remember they exist.

give it enough time and no one will remember anything either of us do.

it's a silly metric. how many great things were forgotten because of some happenstance? and how many bad ones are you still incapable of explaining the success of?

Nazzzak

@katoptris said:

https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3650187#Comment_3650187

Who the survivors? Should we get the sisters as the wendigo and then the brother as a cosmetic?

I feel like Rami Malek is too big a star now to agree to give his likeness. He was in that just before he broke out in Hollywood. Hayden Panettiere probably would do it, so Sam would be an option. Ashley was pretty well liked too iirc.

BlightedDolphin

@katoptris said:

https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3650187#Comment_3650187

Who the survivors? Should we get the sisters as the wendigo and then the brother as a cosmetic?

Probably Sam or Mike. They have the most screen time and the highest amount of plot armour of all the characters (SPOILERS - by plot armour I mean you can't even get either of them killed until the last 5 minutes of the game and even then it's ridiculously specific on how to do it)

They seem to be the 'leading characters' of the game and both have the biggest connection to the sisters and brother during the game.

Although I want Matt but he is the least likely :(

anarchy753

@HaunterofShadows said:

https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3651354#Comment_3651354

While I understand that perspective, I feel like it fails to see the bigger picture. Icons of horror are born from singular movies, that studios usually ruin the magic of by making so many movies for it.

I'll use the ring/ringu as an example. It became an icon of horror off the first movie. The TV scene is iconic even people who don't like horror know it, and the design of sadako/samara was so popular it influences the designs of ghosts today.

Then, because it was so popular, it spawned a few sequels/prequels. But those aren't what most people associate with the movie. They see that first iconic scene of the girl crawling out of the TV, they remember the character picking up the phone and being told 7 days, and they remember the long hair flowing in front of her face, revealing only her eye. And all of these were made iconic by the first movie

Those 'single movies' all generated franchises because they were popular and had unique and lasting impacts on the genre. Can it be argued that some milk the same thing for too long to the point that they become bad? Of course, but they keep making them because people still like the original premise.

I don't think we have enough predictive power to go "oh yeah that movie that got some mediocre reviews this year, that's where the future of horror is." A year down the line people are gonna see a picture of Megan and ask "who's the annoying child?" not "wow, tiktok dance girl."

I'm not saying we can't have modern licenses, I'm just saying there's a big difference between something that was hyped for a month then died, and something worth including in the game long term.

HaunterofShadows

@anarchy753 said:

https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3651373#Comment_3651373

Those 'single movies' all generated franchises because they were popular and had unique and lasting impacts on the genre. Can it be argued that some milk the same thing for too long to the point that they become bad? Of course, but they keep making them because people still like the original premise.

I don't think we have enough predictive power to go "oh yeah that movie that got some mediocre reviews this year, that's where the future of horror is." A year down the line people are gonna see a picture of Megan and ask "who's the annoying child?" not "wow, tiktok dance girl."

I'm not saying we can't have modern licenses, I'm just saying there's a big difference between something that was hyped for a month then died, and something worth including in the game long term.

I guess my point is it doesn't necessarily have to be a franchise. It is most likely going to be a franchise, but something can be popular without being a franchise. They are few and far between, and even fewer are specifically requested for DBD, but two that come to mind are The Cabin in The Woods, and The Babadook.