Connect with us

News

Michael Myers Coming to ‘Dead by Daylight’ Console Version in August!

Be patient. Michael is coming to your console.

Just last month we let you know that Behavior Interactive’s slasher game Dead by Daylight had finally been made available on Xbox One and Playstation 4, but the exciting news was soured a bit when we realized that the “Halloween Chapter” DLC pack was NOT included with the console release.

But today brings really good news.

That pack, which includes Michael Myers and Laurie Strode as playable characters, along with a Haddonfield map, is coming to both Xbox One and Playstation this coming August!

Dead by Daylight is an asymmetrical, multiplayer (4 vs 1) horror game where one player takes on the role of a savage killer, and the other four players become survivors frantically scurrying to avoid being caught, tortured and killed. Survivors play in third-person and have the advantage of better situational awareness. The Killer plays in first-person and is more focused on their prey.

The Survivors’ goal in each encounter is to escape the Killing Ground without getting caught by the Killer – something that sounds easier than it is, especially when the environment changes every time you play.

The Halloween Chapter allows to play as either Michael Myers (killer) or Laurie Strode (survivor) in a special Haddonfield map, which is ripped straight out of the original Halloween.

Behavior producer Mathieu Cote teased last year, “it’s based on the original movie. Michael is the ultimate stalker. So as opposed to all the other killers that we have, Michael sees you and he watches you. So the power of Michael grows as he’s stalking you. And at some point he will be able to build up that meter, that power, until he becomes evil incarnate.



AROUND THE WEB


COMMENTS

44 Comments
  • Sam

    I was hoping October as I was enjoying my break from Myers and that awful Haddonfield map. ,

  • Tor from Yucca Flats

    doesn’t even look like him? and were they too cheap to get Jamie’s real face?

    • Ocelot006 .

      Considering what she charges for an autograph….probably pretty pricy to get her face.

      • Tor from Yucca Flats

        i read shes in top 50 rriches ppl in hollywood

    • Sean Lee Walthour

      the original mask has been long gone. there was also a copyright issue about the william shatner mask and mold, which is why they had to change the look on all the sequels after part 2. I presume that restriction goes for games as well..

      On a good note though, since John Carpenter is back to produce the next Halloween movie, we may get to see the original mask duplicated once again in new media.. here is to hoping.

  • Darkknight2149

    I’m glad they used Jamie Lee Curtis’ appearance for Laurie Strode. I wish Michael was wearing the classic mask.

    http://img12.deviantart.net/a6c4/i/2013/203/7/4/halloween_4_the_return_of_michael_myers_poster_by_digitalwideresource-d6enkzd.jpg

    • Sean Lee Walthour

      they havent used that mask since part 2. legal/copyright issues
      (licensing bullshit) restricts it. People just assumed for some odd reason, they could never “get it right” after halloween 2.. William Shatner’s likeness for that mold, and the situation with DP who made the original shatner mask, are the reason for the restrictions.

      The halloween franchise unfortunately doesn’t own that license..

      • Darkknight2149

        I’m not saying you’re wrong, but that does raise a few questions. Most notably:
        1. How they were able to use that mask on the posters for Halloween 4 and Halloween 5 but not the film itself
        2. Why they didn’t make the redesign scary, instead of creating silly looking masks for all of the sequels until 2007’s Halloween remake.
        https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BZWE2YTU2ZjMtZjRjOS00NjQ3LWIyYzItMTk2N2YxMjY1ZGRiXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTQxNzMzNDI@._V1_UY1200_CR68,0,630,1200_AL_.jpg

        • Sean Lee Walthour

          1. because as stated by carpenter and company, the original mask from Halloween 2 was destroyed in the final scene when it burned
          2. Latex doesn’t age well so by the time 4 and 5 were in play, any backups were useless (one of the actors still has one and it looks terrible..
          3. Using the image of a mask created for the franchise is one thing, reproducing it physically again is restricted because they would again need the William Shatner mold. You are confusing a picture with an actual mask.

          Lastly, its your personal opinion whether the new mask is scary or not, thats subjective. Besides trying to avoid any legal woes by making a plainer looking mask, i also suspect the people working on those sequels had way less integrity in eve putting those movies together in general.

        • Sean Lee Walthour

          btw, the remake doesn’t look like the original either, the mold is actually designed from Tyler Mane’s face in the remakes

          • Darkknight2149

            Yes, I understand that’s 100% my opinion (though I’ve seen other fans who agree). In that regard, I just think they did an awful job redesigning it up until 2007. I’m not the biggest fan of the remake but it made him, at least, look scary again. And I never said the remake mask resembles the original, I just said Michael didn’t cosmetically appear scary again until that film.

            And I should reiterate that I’m not saying you are wrong. I just find it strange that they have the rights to use it on an art poster, but not in the film. Sometimes, these rights issues can be quite petty.

          • Sean Lee Walthour

            “Yes, I understand that’s 100% my opinion (though I’ve seen other fans who agree).”

            ( yes and I’m one of those fans who agree with you on the mask, I’m just saying you can’t ask a subjective question and get an objective answer. for all we know the filmmakers may have thought the other masks worked)

            “”I just find it strange that they have the rights to use it on an art poster, but not in the film.”

            (again, you are confusing the existence of a picture with the existence of a mask. you can’t use a mask anymore that doesn’t exist. the mask was destroyed in halloween 2. the pictures weren’t )

          • Darkknight2149

            Rights are rights. The only point I am making is that it is odd that they have the legal ability to use the design in cover art, but not rebuild the mask for the new films. I wasn’t saying your initial statement incorrect, nor am I confusing the existence of anything. That is it.

          • Sean Lee Walthour

            you indeed ARE confusing the two. The image already exists under a specific copyright. in order to rebuild the likeness in later films, they would need to regain that license which is impossible because Don Post studios had no longer been active. its not odd, you just have a misunderstanding of how the business works (which i don’t share with you, being that I’m in the business myself)…

            John Carpenter had to obtain a license to use the mask in the film, which is actually made by the studio under license for William Shatner and co. This is the answer to why even though Rob Zombie returned a great mask, is still didn’t resemble William Shatner as the original does.

            You have to take in account also that different companies handled different sequels so thats yet another series of red tape.

            Basically, they couldn’t just call up don post studios and get a license to take another shatner mask and alter it, which is essentially you begging the question, because as you yourself stated, “rights are rights”…

            thanx for finally answering your ow question 🙂

          • Darkknight2149

            No matter which way you slice the pie, using the mask everyone is familiar with to advertise not one, but TWO films that feature a different and arguably inferior mask is a problem. Frankly, it’s borderline false advertisement.

          • Sean Lee Walthour

            I wish you would cease treating your personal opinion as a fact, its not.
            There is in no way that is anywhere near false advertisement. thats not even close, its still Michael Myers. You asked a question, i gave you the answer. Deer Park just changed their water bottle design for whatever reason, its still Deer Park, if i complained i didn’t like the new design thats fine, but if i griped that its dishonest and almost illegal, i would be a tad petty….

          • Darkknight2149

            Using the classic mask that everyone is familiar with to advertise a film that doesn’t use that mask is very close to false advertisement, especially when the H4 and H5 masks are generally considered inferior by most of the fanbase (ask around; and that’s probably why they used it in the marketing to begin with.

            And I never stated my opinion as absolutely fact, though there is nothing wrong with me stating it period.

          • Sean Lee Walthour

            “Using the classic mask that everyone is familiar with to advertise a film that doesn’t use that mask is very close to false advertisement,

            (no, it isn’t, thats a false statement and it will be false no matter how many times you repeat it. Its fallacious, you are essentially distorting what false advertisement is, to support your opinion and it isn’t necessary.)

            especially when the H4 and H5 masks are generally considered inferior by most of the fanbase (ask around; and that’s probably why they used it in the marketing to begin with).

            (there is no need for me to ask around, i have already stated we are in agreement on the masks, we share that same opinion. where we differ is your unfounded conclusion on top of that opinion, which is that its false advertisement. it doesn’t matter if its just your opinion, mine or the majority of the fanbase, opinions don’t become facts, due to amount of people who hold them. )

            And I never stated my opinion as absolutely fact, though there is nothing wrong with me stating it period.

            (yes, you have. Everytime you CLAIM its false advertisement you are basing it on your opinion of the mask, do you not see why thats illogical?
            THAT is stating your opinion as a fact. That is separate from your opinion on the mask itself (which is NOT the problem here)

            Its Halloween, the story of Michael Myers as advertised.
            the ONLY way you could be correct is if Michael myers wasn’t in it, etc.

            the fact that WE don’t like the look of the masks in those sequels, don’t mean we can say its false advertisement because is STILL Michael Myers)

          • Darkknight2149

            So you think that using the more iconic version of the mask to get more people to see a film that doesn’t include it… Isn’t borderline false advertisement? It’s certainly dishonest marketing, that much is for sure. What if they used Robert Englund on the poster to sell the Nightmare on Elm Street remake (which actually starred Jackie Earle Haley)? That isn’t much different.

            And no, I didn’t base this on my “opinion” on the mask, or even the fanbase’s opinion on the mask. You just aren’t listening to what I’m saying because you disagree with me that it’s a variation of false advertisement for some unexplained reason.

          • Sean Lee Walthour

            “So you think that using the more iconic version of the mask on the poster to get more people to see the film that doesn’t include it… isn’t borderline false advertisement? I

            (now you are being annoying, you are asking a question you already know my answer is gonna be NO! lol, i have stated numerous times why its not and why its a fact that its not so you asked that question for WHAT purpose?)

            t’s certainly dishonest marketing, that much is for sure.

            (thats YOUR opinion, again, not a fact. )

            What if they used Robert Englund on the poster to sell the Nightmare on Elm Street remake (which actually starred Jackie Earle Haley)? That isn’t much different.

            (there is no what if, because the SAME RULE I’m talking about is why they can’t use that likeness in any such freddy movie. you again, just disproved your own proposition. your analogy would have worked if we were comparing remakes rather than sequels.

            put it like this: if i expected the rob zombie remake to have Tony Moran in it because he was on the cover, THAT would be false advertisement.
            If i accepted that notion, id have to accept a claim that its false advertisement when they used a house in H5 that has zero resemblance to the myers house )

            And no, I didn’t base this on my “opinion” on the mask, or even the fanbase’s opinion on the mask. Y

            (yes you have, because otherwise, you would need to explain WHAT your purpose was to even bring up other people’s opinions.
            Are you admitting you brought up those people’s opinions for no reason? how logical is that? )

            you just aren’t listening to what I’m saying because you disagree with me that it’s a variation of false advertisement for some unexplained reason.

            Incorrect, I’m just not accepting your false claim because its false.
            Now you try to say its a “variation of false advertisement” which is an attempt to deflect being wrong and that is obvious.

            Lastly, the first thing i did was explain the reason, which you admit yourself has been explained. You stubbornly questioning the explanation due to your own personal incredulity, doesn’t allow you to deny the explanation.

            For somebody who isn’t i the business, you sure are trying to tell someone who is in it, how it works… (and failing miserably)

            Summation: we both hate the later masks in the movie series but one of us has a problem separating our personal opinion from established fact.

            GoodKnight, Dark.

          • Darkknight2149
          • Darkknight2149

            Who said it was illegal? And changing the design isn’t the problem here. It’s using a more iconic design to advertise a film that features a completely different one. Your analogy is completely off. In this case, it may not be illegal, but it is dishonest.

            I asked a question, you gave the answer, I questioned the answer, you elaborated, and I gave my opinion on the matter.

          • Sean Lee Walthour

            “Who said it was illegal?

            (quit being obtuse, the point was clear. you can’t mischaracterize something because you don’t like it. Illegal/false advertisement are both fallacious claims in this context. I’m suspicious you got that point by now but are just being intellectually dishonest

            My analogy was right and exact, yo are just begging the question as if your statement was any different. Deep Park is still Deer Park regardless if they change the logo, design or bottle shape.. its ONLY false advertisement if its actually a different brand and the store hides that fact.
            If you had watched H4 or H5 and it was about something else, but had michael myers on the cover, then , you would be correct.)

            And changing the design isn’t the problem here.

            (and now, yo just contradicted your entire statement and please, spare me the semantic game you are failing at trying to play. )

            It’s using a more iconic design to advertise a film that features a completely different one.

            (what you are saying its , changing the design isn’t a problem, the problem is changing the design, or do you not realize you are contradicting yourself?)

            Your analogy is completely off. In this case, it may not be illegal, but it is dishonest.

            (its neither, Michael Myers is advertised, Michael Myers is what you get.
            If all you are gonna do is stubbornly make false claims, we are done here.
            If all Halloween means to you, is a mask that looks like William Shatner, there is no reasoning with you..

            I asked a question, you gave the answer, I questioned the answer, you elaborated, and I gave my opinion on the matter.

            (yes i agree, you are behaving irrational. Your opinion of a fact is irrelevant.)

          • Sean Lee Walthour

            ” I don’t like the masks in H4 and H5, so its false advertising ”

            #NonSequitor

          • Darkknight2149

            “My analogy was right and exact, yo are just begging the question as if your statement was any different. Deep Park is still Deer Park regardless if they change the logo, design or bottle shape.. its ONLY false advertisement if its actually a different brand and the store hides that fact.
            If you had watched H4 or H5 and it was about something else, but had michael myers on the cover, then , you would be correct.)”

            So if you buy a candy bar with a milk chocolate wrapper and it turns out to be dark chocolate, it’s not false advertisement because their both chocolate?

            “” I don’t like the masks in H4 and H5, so its false advertising “”

            That’s not what I said and you know it. Stop trying to twist my statements. It’s not working, and you fail to grasp the point.

            “And changing the design isn’t the problem here. It’s using a more iconic design to advertise a film that features a completely different one.
            (what you are saying its , changing the design isn’t a problem, the problem is changing the design, or do you not realize you are contradicting yourself?)”

            In this instance, changing the design from the classic one in Halloween 4 IN THE MOVIE isn’t the problem. It’s using the classic design on the poster to sell more tickets. They did it again with Halloween 5. Sorry, but no contradictions here.

          • Sean Lee Walthour

            “So if you buy a candy bar with a milk chocolate wrapper and it turns out to be dark chocolate, it’s not false advertisement because their both chocolate?

            (thats a false dichotomy/equivocation because the difference with the candy bar is one is DARK chocolate while advertised as MILK ,
            in THIS case however, the wrapper sells you MICHAEL MYERS and you get MICHAEL MYERS…)

            “” I don’t like the masks in H4 and H5, so its false advertising “”

            That’s not what I said and you know it. Stop trying to twist my statements. It’s not working, and you fail to grasp the point.

            (i twisted nothing, thats exactly what you are saying. you have nothing to support your claim of false advertising, but your personal opinion that it was done to trick people. your reasoning is circular and i reject it.
            how i know its fallacious thinking? you already tried to claim there was no explanation for the art differing from the movie, obviously you asked me, which itself is an admission you was searching for an explanation, and THATS PRECISELY WHY what you are doing now is fallacious.
            You made up your own explanation,(an argument from ignorance) and are clearly frustrated because you have been shown to be doing just that)

            In this instance, changing the design from the classic one in Halloween 4 IN THE MOVIE isn’t the problem. It’s using the classic design on the poster to sell more tickets. They did it again with Halloween 5. Sorry, but no contradictions here.

            (it Is a contradiction. you are repeatedly using qualifiers like “classic” versus “inferior” to make you opinion appear to be factual. I’m not fooled by that tactic, its rather see through and you do it ad nauseam, which is just a waste of your time because its fallacious and it will remain fallacious no matter how much you repeat it. There is no getting around THE FACT you paid to see halloween with michael myers and thats what you got.. )

            •Reply•Share ›

          • Darkknight2149

            Good grief, is this still going?

            “(thats a false dichotomy/equivocation because the difference with the candy bar is one is DARK chocolate while advertised as MILK ,
            in THIS case however, the wrapper sells you MICHAEL MYERS and you get MICHAEL MYERS…)

            No, it sells the classic Michael Myers and that’s not what we got. My equivocation is perfect because, just as they are both Myers, milk and dark are both chocolate. Nobody is disputing that Michael Myers in the film, nor is the “false advertisement” argument about Michael Myers appearing in the film. This argument is about the mask. You are using a strawman fallacy.

            “(i twisted nothing, thats exactly what you are saying.”

            No, but that’s how you willfully chose to misinterpret my statements that you disagree with.

            “(it Is a contradiction. you are repeatedly using qualifiers like “classic” versus “inferior” to make you opinion appear to be factual.”

            Nope. “Classic” isn’t an opinion. In terms of popular widespread culture, the mask in Halloween ’78 is objectively more recognisable and iconic. And you continue to put words in my mouth, given that I never said “inferior” in that statement. Sorry, no opinions there.

            BTW, why do YOU think they used the classic mask to market the films that clearly didn’t have it? You aren’t doing a very good job of justifying it as not being false advertisement.

            “its fallacious and it will remain fallacious no matter how much you repeat it. There is no getting around THE FACT you paid to see halloween with michael myers and thats what you got..”

            Continued strawman fallacy…

            “(there is no what if, because the SAME RULE I’m talking about is why they can’t use that likeness in any such freddy movie. you again, just disproved your own proposition. your analogy would have worked if we were comparing remakes rather than sequels.”

            I’m not even sure what that means, but here’s another analogy – What if the poster to Freddy vs. Jason used Kane Hodder’s Jason on the poster to sell the film? Would that be acceptable, simply because they’re both Jason Voorhees? The same applies with the masks.

            “For somebody who isn’t i the business”

            We’ve got a fortune teller over here! What am I thinking at this exact moment? How many fingers am I holding up? You don’t know a thing about me.

          • Sean Lee Walthour

            “No, it sells the classic Michael Myers and that’s not what we got. My equivocation is perfect because, just as they are both Myers, milk and dark are both chocolate. Nobody is disputing that Michael Myers in the film, nor is the “false advertisement” argument about Michael Myers appearing in the film. This argument is about the mask. You are using a strawman fallacy.

            (lol, the irony, your entire line of reasoning of false advertisement is a straw man, now yo are projecting your behavior onto me, how predictable lol.. btw, ” My equivocation is perfect because” is sadly proof of your confusion because a fallacy can’t be perfect by default, thanks for admitting your statements are fallacious though…)

            “Nope. “Classic” isn’t an opinion.( yes it IS. your resistance to lie to yourself doesn’t affect me one bit. )

            In terms of POPULAR (yet again arguing for other people’s opinions to strengthen your own)

            widespread culture, the mask in Halloween ’78 is objectively more recognisable and iconic.

            (WHICH IS fallacious also, because more recognizable is irrelevant. anybody who thinks rationally will see that poster and realize its a Halloween Movie with Michael Myers in it. so please, stop trying to charge me with YOUR fallacies)

            And you continue to put words in my mouth, given that I never said “inferior” in that statement. Sorry, no opinions there.

            (you said inferior concerning the later masks compared to the earlier masks so stop lying..)

            BTW, why do YOU think they used the classic mask to market the films that clearly didn’t have it?

            (now you are shifting the burden of proof, you made the claim its o you to prove it and you have yet to do so. all you have done is say ” well, i don’t like those masks and other people agree with me, but I’m mentioning them people for no reason.. how dishonest of YOU lol)

            You aren’t doing a very good job of justifying it as not being false advertisement. (because it isn’t my job to disprove your claim, only to reject it because YOU have no proof for it.

            Can you show me YOUR evidence that it was done to be dishonest?

            “”For somebody who isn’t i the business”

            We’ve got a fortune teller over here! What am I thinking at this exact moment? How many fingers am I holding up? You don’t know a thing about me.

            (more nonsense, nobody needs to be a fortune teller to know you are not in the entertainment business, your own statements and comments show that on their own. However you don’t know anything about me, yet you purport to try to tell me what i can understand or know…. that makes you a hypocrite on top of everything else..

            How much music have you produced? more than me?
            how many films or videos have you produced? more than me?

            besides, i can simply ask and watch you dodge answering…..

            Question: ARE YOU in the entertainment business?

          • Darkknight2149

          • Sean Lee Walthour

            thanks for your concession lol

          • Sean Lee Walthour

            “besides, i can simply ask and watch you dodge answering…..

            Question: ARE YOU in the entertainment business?

            (exactly what i thought, we both know you are NOT in the business..

            instead of saying ” yes” you posted a picard meme…

            you are done.. have fun being delusion and obsessive lol

          • Darkknight2149

            In case the faceplam and goodnights weren’t clear, what I am is done with this stupid conversation that doesn’t seem to be going anywhere. Really, we can go back and forth all night.

            You: “No, it isn’t false advertisement because Michael is in the movie. All of your arguments are opinions and you are contradicting myself!”
            Me: “No, I’m not and here is why.”

            And then the cycle repeats…

          • Sean Lee Walthour

            this argument can’t go anywhere because your lack of understanding of how the business works (or logic for that matter) is why we are even having this conversation in the first place…

            Me personally id be humble enough to not try to debate with a barber, if im not one, just because i know how i like my haircut personally.. nor would i pretend to be a barber, in order to appear equally opinionated with that barber…

            you however, are dishonest enough to do just that, acting as if im not telling the truth when i state the obvious: you arent in the entertainment business. so yes, the cycle will repeat, you keep stating false claims and assumptions, i will keep rejecting them and refuting.

            First rule of logic is: You make a positive claim, YOU must prove it..

            So to conclude, we agree that the masks in h4 and up are shitty, thats far as you can get without evidence to support your claim of false advertising.. so again, goodnight, dark.

          • Darkknight2149

            Thank you, sir and good day! I think we’re both done here, but just in case, this goodbye is my final one.

          • Sean Lee Walthour

            you need mental help, you supposed tp be done, yet yo come back to post videos, as if they make you correct some how. Face it, you don’t know what you are talking about, you lie and object to obvious facts, all signs of self delusion…

            Add the fact YOU think the laurie strode in Dead by daylight is Jamie LeeCurtis and its NOT lol

            ” I’m glad they used Jamie Lee Curtis’ appearance for Laurie Strode.”

            (now go ahead and post a meme or video to make yourself feel better about being wrong about that as well.. ctfuuuuuu )

          • Sean Lee Walthour

            (you say you never labeled the later mask as INFERIOR? damn you lie so much, you can’t keep track huh?.shame lol.. let me jog your memory)

            “Using the CLASSIC mask that everyone is familiar with to advertise a film that doesn’t use that mask is very close to false advertisement, especially when the H4 and H5 masks are generally considered INFERIOR ” by most of the fanbase ” (sure, you aren’t trying to use other people’s opinions to make yours seem like a fact lol)

            Googdknight,Dark..

          • Darkknight2149

            “‘In this instance, changing the design from the classic one in Halloween 4 IN THE MOVIE isn’t the problem. It’s using the classic design on the poster to sell more tickets. They did it again with Halloween 5. Sorry, but no contradictions here.’
            (it Is a contradiction. you are repeatedly using qualifiers like “classic” versus “inferior” to make you opinion appear to be factual. I’m not fooled by that tactic, its rather see through and you do it ad nauseam, which is just a waste of your time because its fallacious and it will remain fallacious no matter how much you repeat it. There is no getting around THE FACT you paid to see halloween with michael myers and thats what you got.. )”

            Googjjghkiuyhd-night.

  • Jake

    Will there ever be a single player for PS4?

  • KSE1977

    Sounds great, may have to check it out. Not sure how it compares to Friday the 13th game.

  • Collin

    Is this game better than F13?

    • Tetra-Gramaton-Cleric

      No, but it’s still worth checking out for Halloween fans.

    • rogerklotz

      depends on what you want, this is faster paced then f13

    • Monk

      Yes I think so. Have both and play this way more

  • Tetra-Gramaton-Cleric

More in News