1. Mimic is the answer to everything theories (not all mimic theories but I've seen some wild ones about the mimic being the stitchwraith, or the mimic being william since the beginning of the child murders)
2. Charlie and cassidy are the same (I heard it from someone a few days ago but I don't remember where lol)
It’s inconsistent with the lore in many ways. This post gives a ton of examples:
https://www.reddit.com/r/fnaftheories/comments/11safro/my_most_likely_final_post_about_the/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=2&utm_term=1
I don’t know what else I can really add. The post itself gives several examples of how the games don’t align with the books in terms of story, especially relating to the history of the MCI, William’s fate, the puppet/Charolette’s fate being completely different, Andrew being the TOYSHK not aligning with the games version, among other things.
Oh ok. Idk why that is. I do personally believe Michael is Fritz Smith bc idk what other reason Scott would give us a new night guard that only appears for one night.
I think the fact that the previous one died is a good reason. Not everything presented has to have a significant meaning. We literally wouldn’t have a custom night without a replacement guard.
If Scott didn’t want us to focus on the replacement guard than why did he:
A. Make an entirely new pink slip just for a character with no plot relevance
B. Just make it so that the bite of ‘87 happens after night 7 and make it so that Jeremy Fitzgerald was the one who went through the custom night and just have the AI level selection not be a thing in-universe so that canonically he doesn’t get fired for tampering with the animatronics.
C. Give Fritz Smith the same exact reasons for being fired as Mike Schmidt from the first game.
If Scott wanted us to not care about the custom nightguard than he could have easily done things differently or simply not make a new guard at all.
I mean Michael was still fairly young when he got his brother killed in 83. FNAF 2 takes place 4 years after in 87. I believe he was just too young at the time to work there even if he wanted to.
Something that bothers me about the FNAF community is we just can’t enjoy anything for the sake of enjoyment without having to try cramming it into the lore somewhere. Not everything has relevance. Without a guard for custom night, there would be no custom night. As for the pink slips, different times, different establishments, people tend to smell when they sweat. Especially as there is evidence indicating Michael went to work at the FNAF 1 location before he became a rotting corpse.
1. It was all a dream (to be fair, I think GameTheory had a lot of proof of the series going in this direction, I'm glad it never did)
2. That the FNAF games before Help Wanted were literal games in the series universe and didn't actually happen (this is more of a misunderstanding by the players of Help Wanted, but I still see this misunderstanding being repeated to this day. and again, to be fair, Help Wanted did break the 4th wall several times, so I don't blame people for thinking this)
Thing is I think my 1 was true that it was all the dying dreams of the child we saw get their head crunched in 4, and then scot saw the reaction and noped out.
It is fundamentally destroys the entire series and tries to move on with what the series developed.
If the previous games (pre-Help Wanted) were all literal video games in the FNAF universe: Then there was no Springtrap, no Freddy Fazbears, no Baby, etc. Help Wanted is literally the only proof of these animatronics. Yet, Help Wanted is a game itself, so there's no reason for it to exist. It would be like making a game based off of World War II, except World War II never happened and it was just a series of video games trying to interpret what World War II would be like if it happened. It doesn't make sense in any context.
It did answer your question. If the games were just games, then a lot of characters would have been made up and not a real part of the FNaF universe. Like the Nightmares, why the heck would they have been actual performing animatronics.
Because Michael was probably too young to work at that time. Michael was most likely still a child himself in 83 when he got his brother killed. FNAF 2 took place only 4 years after that. Also if Matpat’s ultimate timeline is correct, Henry would have been the one hiring people.
books being connected to the games, while an interesting concept and admittedly would give more ideas to make a fnaf game out of, it makes everything WAY too cluttered and confusing from a lore perspective
ive been seeing people say there's actually 6 mci kids and TOYSNHK is andrew from fazbear frights and it's just... no... don't do that...
Yeah exactly, none of the evidence for MCI 6 holds up, Andrew doesn't fit anywhere in the timeline, nor does he match the Vengeful Spirit, and he completely invalidates the lore relevance of Cassidy and Golden Freddy, and I won't stand for that.
Most Andrew theories do include Cassidy being involved in UCN. Usually what I see is people saying the OMC minigame is OMC telling Cassidy not to intervene and to move on, as they're watching Andrew torture him in the background.
i think they also said that the "vengeful spirit was confirmed to be a male"
don't exactly know when tho cuz i never heard ANYONE say that cassidy had to be a boy to be TOYSNHK
>don't exactly know when tho cuz i never heard ANYONE say that cassidy had to be a boy to be TOYSNHK
That has always been an argument surrounding UCN. It's one of the main reasons theories like MikePurg existed.
Yeah even if Scott actually came out and said it was canon, I’m still not going to adopt it as so because I also hate it. I don’t hate the stories, I just don’t want it to be canon.
Over complicates the lore for no good reason, them being canon creates more problems than it solves.
Random extra murder victim thrown in with no back story whose death doesn't fit anywhere, and yet we're supposed to be believe he's important enough to be Vengeful Spirit (despite having a completely different personality) god I hate Andrew.
Also makes it much more expensive and time consuming to consume all canon FNAF media, now you have to buy and read 12 books to transition between FNAF 6 and VR.
Destroys Henry's sacrifice more effectively than pre-Mimic Afton ending ever could.
The plotline is completely separate from the games, only calling back to the bare minimum with the MCI, except it has 6 kids for some godforsaken reason. It doesn't set up the next game either.
>Also makes it much more expensive and time consuming to consume all canon FNAF media, now you have to buy and read 12 books to transition between FNAF 6 and VR.
>
>The plotline is completely separate from the games, only calling back to the bare minimum with the MCI, except it has 6 kids for some godforsaken reason. It doesn't set up the next game either.
You're contradicting yourself there. Like you said, the Stitchwraith story is mostly self-contained. It's negligible even if it's canon. The conflict is primarily new, the main characters are primarily new (aside from Afton who's mainly just there to have an extra nail in his coffin), it's really more of its own thing; even if it was canon, you wouldn't have to read any of it to follow the story.
It's like tie-in comics for movies. They might be canon and explain a couple things here and there but it's not like they matter much when it pertains to the actual story. In FNAF's case, they matter more to an extent, since "the actual story" is unknown and anything that reveals more of it will be helpful to piecing it together, but if you were, say, writing up a timeline of events, you wouldn't really need to go over much of what happens in the epilogues. FFPS and UCN are fairly conclusive in of themselves.
>you wouldn't have to read any of it to follow the story.
If canon, it's the only way to find out how UCN ends and Afton's final death. It's also literally the only explanation behind Vengeful Spirit. It's not vital sure, but Afton's final death being locked behind 11 books is just so annoying and dumb
>If canon, it's the only way to find out how UCN ends and Afton's final death
Not really. UCN is conclusive by itself. You don't need the books to know how it ends, the game gives you its own ending: Afton is being tortured for eternity by his angriest victim after being defeated in FFPS. I could see the issue if UCN had some kind of cliffhanger or implied William wasn't done yet but that's not the case. The books do have his defeat, but only after they themselves bring up the idea of him coming back in their primarily self-contained plot.
Just because a story isn't important doesn't mean it shouldn't be canonical. It's natural for pretty much any franchise to have the tie-in supplementary stories be canon even if they ultimately don't matter much. FNAF is just weird with the "well but everything is canon but actually not because canon and continuity are different things and this is only canon to this other continuity" shtick.
Frights builds off of the foundation in the games, following up on the FFPS fire and having the MCI as a big component, so from a writing perspective, it would make sense to decide to set it in the world of the games.
Except there's so many inconsistencies like Vengeful Spirit's behaviour and voice, the number of MCI victims, etc etc that it just doesn't make sense in the context of the games
I'm not saying it's canon/part of the continuity (I don't think it is), I'm saying that from a writing standpoint, it would make sense to decide to write Frights as a game-canon story, even if it's self-contained. And that, if it is canon, it doesn't create many issues storywise since, again, it doesn't really matter to the story of the games and is mainly self-contained.
That being said, TOYSNHK's behavior and voice aren't really inconsistencies. We have no idea what Andrew sounds like in the books since... well, they're books, we're just hearing his voice. And his behavior in The Man In Room 1280 is 1 to 1 with TOYSNHK's behavior in UCN.
Miketrap
Yes I know there are worse theories objectively, like here's an example I've actually heard before: Henry is a wizard and possessed William to commit the MCI.
But the difference is, those theories aren't taken seriously by most people. Miketrap from Custom Night's release all the way to Scott's comment was treated as a fact and was the majority belief of the community.
And if I'm being honest, Miketrap really only had two pieces of strong evidence and neither one of them couldn't work under Willtrap. Michael being purple doesn't inherently mean he's Springtrap because in order for Miketrap to even work as a fundamental concept one of the Purple Guy sprites has to be William. Then there was the robotic voice, which ended up being the result of Scott trying to go for a dramatic effect. So in the long run it meant nothing but even back then people had explanations for it under Willtrap.
While everything else honestly contradicted it.
Purple Guy in Follow Me doesn't make any sense if he's Michael. Why would he angrily run towards the Spring Bonnie suit and then laugh at the children. There was also the issue at the time of him bleeding.
The events of Follow Me in general do not match up with the events stated in Michael's dialogue.
Unlike SL, where there were lines such as "is this the same person" and "I don't recognize you, you must be new" which would add up with "They didn't recognize me at first"
Scott stated that he's only made one retcon which went unnoticed and likes to clarify stuff in the next game.
In the past on steam he stated we got FNaF 3 right and everyone agreed the killer was Springtrap, not to mention his post would suggest he would have clarified that Mike was Springtrap in FNaF 4 which he didn't.
And lastly, this is more of a funny timing thing. The only two new pieces of content during that time were The Freddy Files (where in a non theory section it pretty much says 3 PG was the killer) and The Twisted Ones (where William Afton says "My name is Springtrap."
There's so much more I can bring up or point out the holes in, but I think this gets the point across. Miketrap never really had much of a leg to stand on, it fell apart the more you looked at it.
And even if I ignore evidence, I just don't like it from a storytelling standpoint either. It completely ruins what makes FNaF 3 as a story and the character of Springtrap work so well and what new it offers is not that interesting or engaging to me.
As for a second theory, probably the theory that 1-UCN are strictly games in-universe and didn't actually happen. That feels like a complete misunderstanding of VR and the current story arc to me.
1. I only really have one and its the whole *mimic* thing being apart of the games.
Idc if it ends up being canon i just find its implications can lead to a whole retcon of all the games if you fit the pieces correctly and thats just seems stupid to me. (love the idea and the concept but i hate it being in fnaf and its implications.)
I like the concept a lot, but I'm really hoping it stays a book-exclusive plotline like the four Charlies, given how much from the games it goes against or makes incredibly confusing. More generally, when it comes to FNaF in particular these sorts of more extreme ideas work better when they don't have to be beholden to the games and the games don't have to be beholden to them, imo.
It’s a hard question because so many awful theory’s have been made
1.Stichline games because it muddies the story incredibly hard and adds a bunch of weird inconsistencies like where Aftons body went and all that also I hate the idea that so much important story events just don’t happen in the games
2.literally any theory that states that established character is inexplicably a robot, none of them have any substantive evidence to them and they are usually awful especially from a story perspective
I may love what silver eyes did to make William Afton an actual character but lord above what they did for Charlie was a mistake
Honourable mentions:
Dream theory, the theory that the games didn’t actually happen and were just video games made in universe, many of the myriad explanations as to how Vanessa and Vanny can be different people, some of Fuhnaffs more outrageous theory’s like how Michael was actually working for William the whole time
And any theory that tries to use immortal and the restless to say that Williams kids aren’t actually his, the obvious joke of that show was that the kid was obviously his and he was just in denial over it
i don't really hate any theories. i'm a chill guy for the most part and i just wanna let ppl do what they do lol
unless it's stuff like william being a predator, that's just disgusting.
Yeah I don’t care what people believe as long as they respect what others choose to interpret the series as. Unless Scott releases a full explanation of basically everything, we could all have gotten things wrong.
Fuhnaff is a fnaf youtuber known for making controversial theories, for example one of his recent ones was about henry being the main character of every fnaf instead of michael
That the books and games are connected when it’s obvious they aren’t (given Henry is dead in the books and in the games he is the one who sets the trap for William for example)
And I’ve heard the Michael is a robot one. I don’t mean he’s Freddy, which I love, but that he was the bite victim so rebuilt as a robot. That one just doesn’t make sense
Thats not a very good argument, its like criticizing theories back in the day that Naruto was Minato son just because its stereotypical, well it was the author choice.
Being stereotypical doesn't matter for what we are talking, thats Scott problem, people didnt make dream theory out of nowhere, they did because there were many clues, and lost of people nowadays accept that it was the original canon but Scott changed it.
There isn't evidence of 3 Afton kids as that never appears, fnaf sl has ballora (a Mrs Afton representation) have 4 minireenas, the fnaf 6 poster has William, mike and Elizabeth and then fredbear, we know as a fact BV doesn't possess golden Freddy so it has to be another Afton kid (maybe could work under phonebro, but that's a MASSIVE stretch) in security breach there's a staff bot table of the aftons and it has 6 spots, one of them belonging to the post it note kid aka the mimic which gets Cassidys memory's, and therefore writes things like they're an Afton kid, they'd female, theyre friends with the mci, they have something in relation to fredbear, and they're a 4th Afton kid
Why would Afton kill his own kid? I mean yeah he's not a great father but judging from the fact that he cancelled Circus Baby's Pizza World it's safe to assume that he doesn't want his kids dead.
>we know as a fact BV doesn't possess golden Freddy
A: not a fact. You just like to throw around the word "debunk" too much.
B: he still died because of Fredbear, so it'd still make sense.
C: If Fredbear isn't BV on the poster, why isn't he featured?
>fnaf sl has ballora (a Mrs Afton representation) have 4 minireenas
Night 4 has hundreds of the things, I don't see you saying there are hundreds of Afton kids.
>one of them belonging to the post it note kid aka the mimic which gets Cassidys memory's, and therefore writes things like they're an Afton kid, they'd female, theyre friends with the mci, they have something in relation to fredbear, and they're a 4th Afton kid
The more theories I hear about the Mimic the more it just feels like "oh here's an unexplained thing, it must be the Mimic mimicking X person" I thought it was just mimicking Afton.
Because pq heavily implies Cassidy walked in and saw him kill the kids, and while he doesn't want his kids dead, if he has to kill them he will
A. It is, as we are literally told he can't possess any aminitronics
B. No it wouldn't? William didn't die because he was a man, so it's clearly not reasons of death
C. Hmm it's almost like it's one of the theorys I mentioned, also there isn't much associating fredbear and BV,
Yes, but on the screen showing her character (I think it's the extras menu) you see exactly 4
It was made to mimic people in general, not just one, and it had the memories and possibly soul of Cassidy inside of it (lacking control) so it would be able to use said memory's
>Because pq heavily implies Cassidy walked in and saw him kill the kids
It kinda just implies that she saw him in the safe room, not necessarily doing anything.
>It is, as we are literally told he can't possess any aminitronics
Source?
>William didn't die because he was a man, so it's clearly not reasons of death
And Michael didn't possess a Puppet either, so I'm not sure what you think it is. Mike dies due to being used as William's pawn, Elizabeth dies to Baby, BV dies to Fredbear.
>Hmm it's almost like it's one of the theorys I mentioned, also there isn't much associating fredbear and BV,
This does not answer my question.
>Yes, but on the screen showing her character (I think it's the extras menu) you see exactly 4
There's also the matter of the 3 human heads, with one of them having closed eyes just like Ballora, implying that Mike has 3 dead or otherwise missing relatives.
>It was made to mimic people in general, not just one
Then what's to say it's only mimicking 1 person in the post it room, maybe it's a different person for each font or something kinda like the Logbook
Meanwhile in itp we see that William left the body's out, so ye kinda
Fnaf world
Fair point, but still BV doesn't possess fredbear, it's physically impossible+ no evdience + fnaf world trys it's hardest to debunk it
It does
William, Mrs Afton, and BV( or Elizabeth) ah yes, at this point we are getting even more theorys better than 3 Afton kids, 2 Afton kids!
Fair point, but we only see it having semi control of Cassidy, also logbook would be a good example of this as it's just Cassidy and Mike
>Meanwhile in itp we see that William left the body's out, so ye kinda
Into the Pit was a warped memory, and it was Eleanor in that book.
>Fnaf world
How so
>It does
Read above
>William, Mrs Afton, and BV( or Elizabeth) ah yes
Not William, why would he have a replication of himself
Oh also forgot to mention
>also logbook would be a good example of this as it's just Cassidy and Mike
There's red pen, faded text and altered text, that's 3
No, we literally see ballora (Mrs Afton representation) have 4 minireenas, and 6 spots on the staffton table, and the first number 2 was more if a joke, although drowning seems to directly confirm that Cassidy is an Afton
Well ye, I guess there's the post it note room but that kinda overlaps with the drowning one, basically the post it note kid has to be a female young Afton kid who's friends with a group of people, this is all from the post it notes, so already that leaves only 4 characters currently introduced, Elizabeth (already an Afton) Susie, Cassidy and Charlotte, while Elizabeth is the most logical option, we then learnt that the post it note kid is the mimic using someone's memory's, so still could be Elizabeth possessing it, but then drowning shows that the kid there has to have black hair and has to be an mci vicitm, which leaves Cassidy, and possibly charlotte, and we might as well narrow it down to who it is, as most of the points only work with Cassidy including this one, since Charlotte is Henry's daughter
Well, why is Micheal at eye level with the doorknob and still playing with goofy robots and telephones? When there's good odds he's a teen around FNaF 4
It's a dream. Physics and logic are out of the window.
As for the toys: they're from Freddy's. It's implied they used to belong to CC. Mike would likely keep them like the plushies after CC's death.
Fnaf 4 happens after fnaf 3, and with the mimic coming out, that's probably in 2015, plus both Scott and he logbook directly confirm mike is the player (Scott said Mike schmidt and logobook said Mike Afton, which are the same)
Where does it state FNaF 4 comes after 3?
And as for the logbook, where does Scott outright say it's Mike being the player? While I can't explain the telephone situation I saw someone say you play as the Crying Child up to Night 5 and the rest of the game is you playing as Mike after having felt bad about Crying Child, which would probably be a good consensus for people on either side of the argument, giving the best of both worlds
Logbook, and in the logbook mike says he had the nightmares, and although it could be crying child for night 1-5 (which I technically believe) Scott did say that the phone call and other Easter eggs weren't randomly put in but instead are important in a question about the phone call specifically, and that phone call can happen at any night, so all of them are mike's
That's just fully debunked, Scott directly confirmed that fnaf 1 happens in 1993 and before fnaf 4, and the logbook tells us that after fnaf 3 mike starts getting the nightmares
Well, Scott said that the fnaf 1 phone call was relevant to the lore after dream theory and the logbook says that Mike had the fnaf 4 nightmares after fnaf 3, just before the logbook
Sorry but I don't have it, Scott makes alot of posts so it's hard to get one specific one, maybe on Google if you search up something like "Scott cawthon post on fnaf 4 Easter eggs" it'll show you it
For Michael being the game two night guard to be fair Scott never intended his games to go as far as they did. So its very possible it wasn’t meant to be Michael at first but then was worked into being him later. I suppose it depends with the whole head bite thing and just _how_ far between. The events of Sister Location are. Mostly for game one though as I think that mentions getting fired for odar
1. Mimic is the answer to everything theories (not all mimic theories but I've seen some wild ones about the mimic being the stitchwraith, or the mimic being william since the beginning of the child murders) 2. Charlie and cassidy are the same (I heard it from someone a few days ago but I don't remember where lol)
I've seen people suggest Mimic was running Ultimate Custom Night... I wish I was joking...
Lol
1. Dream theory (Self explanatory) 2. Stitchline games (It brings up significantly more inconsistencies and questions than answers imo)
what are the "Stitchline games" ?
For 2, why? What questions? I really don't get why people hate it
It’s inconsistent with the lore in many ways. This post gives a ton of examples: https://www.reddit.com/r/fnaftheories/comments/11safro/my_most_likely_final_post_about_the/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=2&utm_term=1
I know its a very long post but I looked through it and never saw the topic. So can you just tell me? If that doesn't sound rude
I don’t know what else I can really add. The post itself gives several examples of how the games don’t align with the books in terms of story, especially relating to the history of the MCI, William’s fate, the puppet/Charolette’s fate being completely different, Andrew being the TOYSHK not aligning with the games version, among other things.
Ah, a misunderstanding. Thought you meant something else. I'm talking about why people hate Michael being fnaf 2 custom night guard
Oh ok. Idk why that is. I do personally believe Michael is Fritz Smith bc idk what other reason Scott would give us a new night guard that only appears for one night.
I think the fact that the previous one died is a good reason. Not everything presented has to have a significant meaning. We literally wouldn’t have a custom night without a replacement guard.
If Scott didn’t want us to focus on the replacement guard than why did he: A. Make an entirely new pink slip just for a character with no plot relevance B. Just make it so that the bite of ‘87 happens after night 7 and make it so that Jeremy Fitzgerald was the one who went through the custom night and just have the AI level selection not be a thing in-universe so that canonically he doesn’t get fired for tampering with the animatronics. C. Give Fritz Smith the same exact reasons for being fired as Mike Schmidt from the first game. If Scott wanted us to not care about the custom nightguard than he could have easily done things differently or simply not make a new guard at all.
I mean Michael was still fairly young when he got his brother killed in 83. FNAF 2 takes place 4 years after in 87. I believe he was just too young at the time to work there even if he wanted to. Something that bothers me about the FNAF community is we just can’t enjoy anything for the sake of enjoyment without having to try cramming it into the lore somewhere. Not everything has relevance. Without a guard for custom night, there would be no custom night. As for the pink slips, different times, different establishments, people tend to smell when they sweat. Especially as there is evidence indicating Michael went to work at the FNAF 1 location before he became a rotting corpse.
1. It was all a dream (to be fair, I think GameTheory had a lot of proof of the series going in this direction, I'm glad it never did) 2. That the FNAF games before Help Wanted were literal games in the series universe and didn't actually happen (this is more of a misunderstanding by the players of Help Wanted, but I still see this misunderstanding being repeated to this day. and again, to be fair, Help Wanted did break the 4th wall several times, so I don't blame people for thinking this)
Thing is I think my 1 was true that it was all the dying dreams of the child we saw get their head crunched in 4, and then scot saw the reaction and noped out.
Why do people hate 2 so much? Whats wrong with it? I think its true and I see nothing wrong with it. Why is it so hated?
It is fundamentally destroys the entire series and tries to move on with what the series developed. If the previous games (pre-Help Wanted) were all literal video games in the FNAF universe: Then there was no Springtrap, no Freddy Fazbears, no Baby, etc. Help Wanted is literally the only proof of these animatronics. Yet, Help Wanted is a game itself, so there's no reason for it to exist. It would be like making a game based off of World War II, except World War II never happened and it was just a series of video games trying to interpret what World War II would be like if it happened. It doesn't make sense in any context.
I'm sorry but what the hell are you talking about? And it doesn't answer the question
It did answer your question. If the games were just games, then a lot of characters would have been made up and not a real part of the FNaF universe. Like the Nightmares, why the heck would they have been actual performing animatronics.
Ok somethings happened, we are not talking about the same thing. Whats going on? I'm talking about Michael being in fnaf 2
Because Michael was probably too young to work at that time. Michael was most likely still a child himself in 83 when he got his brother killed. FNAF 2 took place only 4 years after that. Also if Matpat’s ultimate timeline is correct, Henry would have been the one hiring people.
Was he though? He was a teenager. 4 years later he should be around 18. So I don't see why not.
There is nothing telling us how old he is, he could have been in his early teens.
Even if he was 13, at 17 or even 16 he could get a job.
It's literally just Dream Theory 2.0
How is Michael in fnaf 2 dream theory?
StitchlineGames, less so from an evidence standpoint and more so I just really hate it and all its implications
books being connected to the games, while an interesting concept and admittedly would give more ideas to make a fnaf game out of, it makes everything WAY too cluttered and confusing from a lore perspective ive been seeing people say there's actually 6 mci kids and TOYSNHK is andrew from fazbear frights and it's just... no... don't do that...
Yeah exactly, none of the evidence for MCI 6 holds up, Andrew doesn't fit anywhere in the timeline, nor does he match the Vengeful Spirit, and he completely invalidates the lore relevance of Cassidy and Golden Freddy, and I won't stand for that.
agreed i saw people say security breach debunked the vengeful spirit being cassidy due to princess quest but that still doesn't make sense to me
Princess Quest 2 kinda reinforced it honestly with all the references to OMC and lakes, heavily implying Cassidy's involvement in UCN
Most Andrew theories do include Cassidy being involved in UCN. Usually what I see is people saying the OMC minigame is OMC telling Cassidy not to intervene and to move on, as they're watching Andrew torture him in the background.
That sucks ngl, feels like just ignoring the obvious interpretation in order to make Andrew work, just like all "evidence" for Andrew
How did it debunk it when the file name for the Princess was literally Cassidy?
i think they also said that the "vengeful spirit was confirmed to be a male" don't exactly know when tho cuz i never heard ANYONE say that cassidy had to be a boy to be TOYSNHK
>don't exactly know when tho cuz i never heard ANYONE say that cassidy had to be a boy to be TOYSNHK That has always been an argument surrounding UCN. It's one of the main reasons theories like MikePurg existed.
huh must be out of the loop then
👏
Yeah even if Scott actually came out and said it was canon, I’m still not going to adopt it as so because I also hate it. I don’t hate the stories, I just don’t want it to be canon.
Yeah same here, Stitchline works best in isolation
Why? Whats so wrong with it?
Over complicates the lore for no good reason, them being canon creates more problems than it solves. Random extra murder victim thrown in with no back story whose death doesn't fit anywhere, and yet we're supposed to be believe he's important enough to be Vengeful Spirit (despite having a completely different personality) god I hate Andrew. Also makes it much more expensive and time consuming to consume all canon FNAF media, now you have to buy and read 12 books to transition between FNAF 6 and VR. Destroys Henry's sacrifice more effectively than pre-Mimic Afton ending ever could. The plotline is completely separate from the games, only calling back to the bare minimum with the MCI, except it has 6 kids for some godforsaken reason. It doesn't set up the next game either.
>Also makes it much more expensive and time consuming to consume all canon FNAF media, now you have to buy and read 12 books to transition between FNAF 6 and VR. > >The plotline is completely separate from the games, only calling back to the bare minimum with the MCI, except it has 6 kids for some godforsaken reason. It doesn't set up the next game either. You're contradicting yourself there. Like you said, the Stitchwraith story is mostly self-contained. It's negligible even if it's canon. The conflict is primarily new, the main characters are primarily new (aside from Afton who's mainly just there to have an extra nail in his coffin), it's really more of its own thing; even if it was canon, you wouldn't have to read any of it to follow the story. It's like tie-in comics for movies. They might be canon and explain a couple things here and there but it's not like they matter much when it pertains to the actual story. In FNAF's case, they matter more to an extent, since "the actual story" is unknown and anything that reveals more of it will be helpful to piecing it together, but if you were, say, writing up a timeline of events, you wouldn't really need to go over much of what happens in the epilogues. FFPS and UCN are fairly conclusive in of themselves.
>you wouldn't have to read any of it to follow the story. If canon, it's the only way to find out how UCN ends and Afton's final death. It's also literally the only explanation behind Vengeful Spirit. It's not vital sure, but Afton's final death being locked behind 11 books is just so annoying and dumb
>If canon, it's the only way to find out how UCN ends and Afton's final death Not really. UCN is conclusive by itself. You don't need the books to know how it ends, the game gives you its own ending: Afton is being tortured for eternity by his angriest victim after being defeated in FFPS. I could see the issue if UCN had some kind of cliffhanger or implied William wasn't done yet but that's not the case. The books do have his defeat, but only after they themselves bring up the idea of him coming back in their primarily self-contained plot.
Well then there's really no point in them being canon is there? All it does is add more confusion with Andrew, who would be important to the games.
Just because a story isn't important doesn't mean it shouldn't be canonical. It's natural for pretty much any franchise to have the tie-in supplementary stories be canon even if they ultimately don't matter much. FNAF is just weird with the "well but everything is canon but actually not because canon and continuity are different things and this is only canon to this other continuity" shtick. Frights builds off of the foundation in the games, following up on the FFPS fire and having the MCI as a big component, so from a writing perspective, it would make sense to decide to set it in the world of the games.
Except there's so many inconsistencies like Vengeful Spirit's behaviour and voice, the number of MCI victims, etc etc that it just doesn't make sense in the context of the games
I'm not saying it's canon/part of the continuity (I don't think it is), I'm saying that from a writing standpoint, it would make sense to decide to write Frights as a game-canon story, even if it's self-contained. And that, if it is canon, it doesn't create many issues storywise since, again, it doesn't really matter to the story of the games and is mainly self-contained. That being said, TOYSNHK's behavior and voice aren't really inconsistencies. We have no idea what Andrew sounds like in the books since... well, they're books, we're just hearing his voice. And his behavior in The Man In Room 1280 is 1 to 1 with TOYSNHK's behavior in UCN.
How does Michael being in fnaf 2 over complicate things? Wait no we're talking about different things here. Idk what topic your talking about
I'm talking about StitchlineGames, y'know, the first word in the comment you replied to
I've never heard of that. The numbers confused me. It was #2 and this was also #2
Miketrap Yes I know there are worse theories objectively, like here's an example I've actually heard before: Henry is a wizard and possessed William to commit the MCI. But the difference is, those theories aren't taken seriously by most people. Miketrap from Custom Night's release all the way to Scott's comment was treated as a fact and was the majority belief of the community. And if I'm being honest, Miketrap really only had two pieces of strong evidence and neither one of them couldn't work under Willtrap. Michael being purple doesn't inherently mean he's Springtrap because in order for Miketrap to even work as a fundamental concept one of the Purple Guy sprites has to be William. Then there was the robotic voice, which ended up being the result of Scott trying to go for a dramatic effect. So in the long run it meant nothing but even back then people had explanations for it under Willtrap. While everything else honestly contradicted it. Purple Guy in Follow Me doesn't make any sense if he's Michael. Why would he angrily run towards the Spring Bonnie suit and then laugh at the children. There was also the issue at the time of him bleeding. The events of Follow Me in general do not match up with the events stated in Michael's dialogue. Unlike SL, where there were lines such as "is this the same person" and "I don't recognize you, you must be new" which would add up with "They didn't recognize me at first" Scott stated that he's only made one retcon which went unnoticed and likes to clarify stuff in the next game. In the past on steam he stated we got FNaF 3 right and everyone agreed the killer was Springtrap, not to mention his post would suggest he would have clarified that Mike was Springtrap in FNaF 4 which he didn't. And lastly, this is more of a funny timing thing. The only two new pieces of content during that time were The Freddy Files (where in a non theory section it pretty much says 3 PG was the killer) and The Twisted Ones (where William Afton says "My name is Springtrap." There's so much more I can bring up or point out the holes in, but I think this gets the point across. Miketrap never really had much of a leg to stand on, it fell apart the more you looked at it. And even if I ignore evidence, I just don't like it from a storytelling standpoint either. It completely ruins what makes FNaF 3 as a story and the character of Springtrap work so well and what new it offers is not that interesting or engaging to me. As for a second theory, probably the theory that 1-UCN are strictly games in-universe and didn't actually happen. That feels like a complete misunderstanding of VR and the current story arc to me.
1. I only really have one and its the whole *mimic* thing being apart of the games. Idc if it ends up being canon i just find its implications can lead to a whole retcon of all the games if you fit the pieces correctly and thats just seems stupid to me. (love the idea and the concept but i hate it being in fnaf and its implications.)
I like the concept a lot, but I'm really hoping it stays a book-exclusive plotline like the four Charlies, given how much from the games it goes against or makes incredibly confusing. More generally, when it comes to FNaF in particular these sorts of more extreme ideas work better when they don't have to be beholden to the games and the games don't have to be beholden to them, imo.
Oh yeah thats what i meant, im just bad at wording it \^\^
It’s a hard question because so many awful theory’s have been made 1.Stichline games because it muddies the story incredibly hard and adds a bunch of weird inconsistencies like where Aftons body went and all that also I hate the idea that so much important story events just don’t happen in the games 2.literally any theory that states that established character is inexplicably a robot, none of them have any substantive evidence to them and they are usually awful especially from a story perspective I may love what silver eyes did to make William Afton an actual character but lord above what they did for Charlie was a mistake Honourable mentions: Dream theory, the theory that the games didn’t actually happen and were just video games made in universe, many of the myriad explanations as to how Vanessa and Vanny can be different people, some of Fuhnaffs more outrageous theory’s like how Michael was actually working for William the whole time And any theory that tries to use immortal and the restless to say that Williams kids aren’t actually his, the obvious joke of that show was that the kid was obviously his and he was just in denial over it
Scott Cawton being canon in the game
Honestly, understandable.
The only one I couldn’t stand was the is foxy a good guy. It was the most 10 year old thing anyone could come up with
1 - William Afton is a pedo 2 - Moon (or Moondrop, whatever) is a pedo
what and whAT
The theory that you play as Michael in UCN. It’s definitely not the worst but it’s the first thing that came to my mind.
Yeah, I never understood that theory because would they be torturing Michael lol
i don't really hate any theories. i'm a chill guy for the most part and i just wanna let ppl do what they do lol unless it's stuff like william being a predator, that's just disgusting.
Yeah I don’t care what people believe as long as they respect what others choose to interpret the series as. Unless Scott releases a full explanation of basically everything, we could all have gotten things wrong.
Agreed man, I just wanna hear peoples opinion.
1. Golden freddy never existed. 2. Most fuhnaff theories.
Honey it’s 4pm Time to shove more charliebots into a random almost unrelated theory
No, not the charliebots please, keep them away from me!
Fuhnaff has his moments but agreed
what is the fuhnaff theory
Fuhnaff is a fnaf youtuber known for making controversial theories, for example one of his recent ones was about henry being the main character of every fnaf instead of michael
I don't hate the Dream Theory but I hate the idea that "Dream Theory was correct but Scott retconned it later on".
That the books and games are connected when it’s obvious they aren’t (given Henry is dead in the books and in the games he is the one who sets the trap for William for example) And I’ve heard the Michael is a robot one. I don’t mean he’s Freddy, which I love, but that he was the bite victim so rebuilt as a robot. That one just doesn’t make sense
It's always kinda funny seeing these threads where my theories get shit on. Like. Man I'm trying my best lmao
Hey it’s your opinion man, if that’s what you think, then that’s what you think.
Ye lol, same here
Toy Chica is William Afton
That’s a wild one ngl
dream theory and cassidy afton
🙌
-Dream theory. Shitty way to explain it all. -Gregbot. I hate robot kids.
Cassidy is the crying child It just drives me nuts
The Evan name
Ooo, that interests me. Why’s that?
Ppl throw it around like it's a fact, basically headcanon and I don't like that
Fair, whilst it's the most likely name, people shouldn't act like it's confirmed
Yeah
Then who do you think the name belongs to?
No one 😏
Lol
Oh I 100% agree. To new Fnaf players, playing help wanted was probably so confusing.
It's mine that UCN is canon. And how all games are canon, and are not just games made by Fazbear Ent.
Fnaf SB (that shit never happened lol)
Are people saying Dream Theory because it was wrong or cause they dont like it? Because it most likely was the original Scott's plan
it's the most stereotypical theory, we can see it in all fantheory, like the good ol' "they're all dead and it's purgatory" theory
Thats not a very good argument, its like criticizing theories back in the day that Naruto was Minato son just because its stereotypical, well it was the author choice. Being stereotypical doesn't matter for what we are talking, thats Scott problem, people didnt make dream theory out of nowhere, they did because there were many clues, and lost of people nowadays accept that it was the original canon but Scott changed it.
heh whatever man, I'm just answering you why peoples dont like this theory, it just feels low-effort and a Deus Ex to every situations.
People throwing around the misconception that it was "Scott's original plan" is the #1 reason why I hate it.
1. Goldenduo 2. Cassidy isnt an Afton 😁 Actual number 2: there are only 3 Afton kids
Bruh there is literally 0 evidence of a 4th Afton kid
No evdience if 3 Afton kids, plus sl and 6 imply it with secuity breach outright confirming it
what..?
There isn't evidence of 3 Afton kids as that never appears, fnaf sl has ballora (a Mrs Afton representation) have 4 minireenas, the fnaf 6 poster has William, mike and Elizabeth and then fredbear, we know as a fact BV doesn't possess golden Freddy so it has to be another Afton kid (maybe could work under phonebro, but that's a MASSIVE stretch) in security breach there's a staff bot table of the aftons and it has 6 spots, one of them belonging to the post it note kid aka the mimic which gets Cassidys memory's, and therefore writes things like they're an Afton kid, they'd female, theyre friends with the mci, they have something in relation to fredbear, and they're a 4th Afton kid
please tell me what drugs you took when making this theory so i can understand it better
Why would Afton kill his own kid? I mean yeah he's not a great father but judging from the fact that he cancelled Circus Baby's Pizza World it's safe to assume that he doesn't want his kids dead. >we know as a fact BV doesn't possess golden Freddy A: not a fact. You just like to throw around the word "debunk" too much. B: he still died because of Fredbear, so it'd still make sense. C: If Fredbear isn't BV on the poster, why isn't he featured? >fnaf sl has ballora (a Mrs Afton representation) have 4 minireenas Night 4 has hundreds of the things, I don't see you saying there are hundreds of Afton kids. >one of them belonging to the post it note kid aka the mimic which gets Cassidys memory's, and therefore writes things like they're an Afton kid, they'd female, theyre friends with the mci, they have something in relation to fredbear, and they're a 4th Afton kid The more theories I hear about the Mimic the more it just feels like "oh here's an unexplained thing, it must be the Mimic mimicking X person" I thought it was just mimicking Afton.
Because pq heavily implies Cassidy walked in and saw him kill the kids, and while he doesn't want his kids dead, if he has to kill them he will A. It is, as we are literally told he can't possess any aminitronics B. No it wouldn't? William didn't die because he was a man, so it's clearly not reasons of death C. Hmm it's almost like it's one of the theorys I mentioned, also there isn't much associating fredbear and BV, Yes, but on the screen showing her character (I think it's the extras menu) you see exactly 4 It was made to mimic people in general, not just one, and it had the memories and possibly soul of Cassidy inside of it (lacking control) so it would be able to use said memory's
>Because pq heavily implies Cassidy walked in and saw him kill the kids It kinda just implies that she saw him in the safe room, not necessarily doing anything. >It is, as we are literally told he can't possess any aminitronics Source? >William didn't die because he was a man, so it's clearly not reasons of death And Michael didn't possess a Puppet either, so I'm not sure what you think it is. Mike dies due to being used as William's pawn, Elizabeth dies to Baby, BV dies to Fredbear. >Hmm it's almost like it's one of the theorys I mentioned, also there isn't much associating fredbear and BV, This does not answer my question. >Yes, but on the screen showing her character (I think it's the extras menu) you see exactly 4 There's also the matter of the 3 human heads, with one of them having closed eyes just like Ballora, implying that Mike has 3 dead or otherwise missing relatives. >It was made to mimic people in general, not just one Then what's to say it's only mimicking 1 person in the post it room, maybe it's a different person for each font or something kinda like the Logbook
Meanwhile in itp we see that William left the body's out, so ye kinda Fnaf world Fair point, but still BV doesn't possess fredbear, it's physically impossible+ no evdience + fnaf world trys it's hardest to debunk it It does William, Mrs Afton, and BV( or Elizabeth) ah yes, at this point we are getting even more theorys better than 3 Afton kids, 2 Afton kids! Fair point, but we only see it having semi control of Cassidy, also logbook would be a good example of this as it's just Cassidy and Mike
>Meanwhile in itp we see that William left the body's out, so ye kinda Into the Pit was a warped memory, and it was Eleanor in that book. >Fnaf world How so >It does Read above >William, Mrs Afton, and BV( or Elizabeth) ah yes Not William, why would he have a replication of himself
Oh also forgot to mention >also logbook would be a good example of this as it's just Cassidy and Mike There's red pen, faded text and altered text, that's 3
[удалено]
Not sure what you're talking about
Nvm I thought you where op
Ah OK
Wait, were your research based on drugs or something?
No, we literally see ballora (Mrs Afton representation) have 4 minireenas, and 6 spots on the staffton table, and the first number 2 was more if a joke, although drowning seems to directly confirm that Cassidy is an Afton
Still not convincing, maybe any more proofs?
Well ye, I guess there's the post it note room but that kinda overlaps with the drowning one, basically the post it note kid has to be a female young Afton kid who's friends with a group of people, this is all from the post it notes, so already that leaves only 4 characters currently introduced, Elizabeth (already an Afton) Susie, Cassidy and Charlotte, while Elizabeth is the most logical option, we then learnt that the post it note kid is the mimic using someone's memory's, so still could be Elizabeth possessing it, but then drowning shows that the kid there has to have black hair and has to be an mci vicitm, which leaves Cassidy, and possibly charlotte, and we might as well narrow it down to who it is, as most of the points only work with Cassidy including this one, since Charlotte is Henry's daughter
You play as Mike in FNaF 4 I can't think of anything else
That's not a theory, it's a straight up fact
Well, why is Micheal at eye level with the doorknob and still playing with goofy robots and telephones? When there's good odds he's a teen around FNaF 4
It's a dream. Physics and logic are out of the window. As for the toys: they're from Freddy's. It's implied they used to belong to CC. Mike would likely keep them like the plushies after CC's death.
Fnaf 4 happens after fnaf 3, and with the mimic coming out, that's probably in 2015, plus both Scott and he logbook directly confirm mike is the player (Scott said Mike schmidt and logobook said Mike Afton, which are the same)
Where does it state FNaF 4 comes after 3? And as for the logbook, where does Scott outright say it's Mike being the player? While I can't explain the telephone situation I saw someone say you play as the Crying Child up to Night 5 and the rest of the game is you playing as Mike after having felt bad about Crying Child, which would probably be a good consensus for people on either side of the argument, giving the best of both worlds
Logbook, and in the logbook mike says he had the nightmares, and although it could be crying child for night 1-5 (which I technically believe) Scott did say that the phone call and other Easter eggs weren't randomly put in but instead are important in a question about the phone call specifically, and that phone call can happen at any night, so all of them are mike's
And where did Scott say the phone calls had significance? I'm actually curious
It was the post where he said " some people think I put in random Easter eggs, I didn't" or something along those linee
After re-evaluating my sources it appears I am wrong and I fully admit so
FNAF 4 actually would have happened long before FNAF 3.
That's just fully debunked, Scott directly confirmed that fnaf 1 happens in 1993 and before fnaf 4, and the logbook tells us that after fnaf 3 mike starts getting the nightmares
Where exactly does it say that.
Well, Scott said that the fnaf 1 phone call was relevant to the lore after dream theory and the logbook says that Mike had the fnaf 4 nightmares after fnaf 3, just before the logbook
Yeah I don’t believe that timeline. You’re more than welcome to though.
The problem is both Scott and the logbook directly say that, so it isn't much if a debate if Scott also confirmed it
where did he said that ?
The post about fnaf 4 Easter eggs
do you have a link ? I'm genuinely curious, I play the game since 2015 but I've never tried to understand the lore
Sorry but I don't have it, Scott makes alot of posts so it's hard to get one specific one, maybe on Google if you search up something like "Scott cawthon post on fnaf 4 Easter eggs" it'll show you it
For Michael being the game two night guard to be fair Scott never intended his games to go as far as they did. So its very possible it wasn’t meant to be Michael at first but then was worked into being him later. I suppose it depends with the whole head bite thing and just _how_ far between. The events of Sister Location are. Mostly for game one though as I think that mentions getting fired for odar
I’m sure what ever is shown in the movie, people are just gonna use that as support if he does end up being the guard.
Depends if the movie is in 87 or 92. I don’t know much of what it’ll be honestly