Hey guys, I actually wanted to make a pretty significant adjustment towards the narrative I put forth during my FNAF 2-3 section of the video. I stated that the story of fnaf 1-4 was the story of Mike Schmidt and there are 2 Purple Guys and- just- like… its all super unnecessary I think. The important bits of the theory stand on their own without adding that stuff in and needlessly complicating the 4 games, 1 story narrative. I really wanted to force the whole Mike as protag thing for no reason, I don’t think Scott had that idea at the time. This era was all about roles and not named characters so I think it makes more sense to think of 4 games, 1 story as 4 games telling the story of Freddy Fazbear’s Pizza. It wasn’t the story of one character, and it wouldn’t be until Sister Location. I plan to elaborate on this further in my next video but I have no idea when that's going to be, and the increasing number of people watching the video has made me anxious that people will come away with the impression that I firmly believe every single bit of narrativization that I lay out in the video.
Completely! If you approach your theory from a different angle it still stands. For example, Afton may not have existed yet in Fnaf4 but we can still infer the character placing the head on a suit it's the same character from fnaf3 merely cus of design and color. Regardless, fnaf4 is about the event of the bite, NOT the characters portrayed in them, so Afton in the background is merely a 'background detail' (at least at the time, later on he became a developed character) so youre whole structure of fnaf 1-4 being more about a theme rather than solving who is who and why they did what they did, is imo pretty spot on!
Thank you for clarifying this, because when I saw you insist that the purple guy in the first 4 Follow Me minigames was Mike, despite being identical to Follow Me 5's guy, I was about to leave right then and there. I can't handle that kind of stuff at 10pm. Can't wait to see a possible follow-up, though! The rest of this video is really well thought-out and informed!
@@syweb2 thanks so much for watching all the way through. If I knew this video was gonna get so much attention I would have taken a fine-toothed comb to the script. I'm glad you still enjoyed it and I hope my next theory is more thoroughly enjoyable
Scott added a Golden Fredddy jumpscare to Fnaf 1’s custom night if you put “1987” because there was a popular hoax when the game first came out that if you put 1987 as the difficulty Golden Freddy would jumpscare you. It most likely has no significance. I do like this video though, I always like when people aren’t afraid to spice up the narrative haha.
I don't think they're mutually exclusive ideas. Scott could have put ANY jumpscare there and if he didn't want the association he could have changed the jumpscare again.
I'm pretty sure there were actually numerous rumors about what putting 1987 into the difficulty did. One I definitely remember is it allegedly showing what the kitchen camera looks like.
They’re gonna be pissed that you don’t think Scott is a master storyteller and really didn’t start making his story till FNAF 2 which is why FNAF 1 is so rarely discussed when it comes to lore. I think it’s safe to say all the answers are in FNAF 3&4
I literally just rewatched the movie and was thinking mike and abby HAD to parallel a relationship in the games. And this theory helps put so much evidence into that
I have to listen to this again to grasp everything, but Mike can't be the one dismantling the animatronics, if that's will getting spinglocked right? Scott disproved miketrap himself
I think they're saying that the first four post-night FNAF 3 minigames are Mike Schmidt dismantling the animatronics, and then the night 5 minigame is the killer showing up to the location for some reason later on?
I would say there is some hint that the player character was the same from only fnaf 1-3. The fact that the phantoms have characters from fnaf 1 and 2 implies the player is familiar with both. This could be for other reasons but given the fnaf 2 location was possibly only open for a very short time and mangle being an animatronic that most likely wouldnt have been advertised to the public makes this case stronger. Also the termination letters from fnaf 1 and 2 being the same, while probably just a funny joke, does hint at this too. It also makes sense for the rationale of the player character coming back every night, they must be someone with a personal attachment and motivation to investigate the locations. Although that doesnt explain nights 1-5 of fnaf 2.
I remember that a popular speculation during FNAF2-3 era was that we are in fact playing a private detective trying to investigate what happened inside of the restaurants, which explains the closeness between the names of our protagonists.
I love this video, it reminds me of old FNAF theory videos. I’ve watched quite a few modern FNAF theory videos and they just don’t hit the same as videos like this.
So, I've had a feverish idea in my brain for a couple months that I figured some stuff out about FNAF 1-4 and needed to write a script to explain it. And you've hit on like, most of it! I think you're 100% about the story not being that developed in the first games and that William didn't exist in FNAF 4. And yeah, the agreed we could have gotten to the player being the guard in all 4 games without later developments. The focus was never on the killer, but because the fandom wanted it, it happened. I like the idea that the twin possession of Golden Freddie is the retcon, because I 100% agree crying child was Golden Freddie originally. What made Golden Freddie different was an outstanding question and FNAF 4 is basically all about it.
@@TheFlinchyDinosaurI feel like I've lost it, having made 0 videos before. But here I am, working on a script to make sure no one else has already said it😅
FNAF 4 could've been a satisfying conclusion if you think about it. FNAF 4 was made to be the final chapter but there are lots of things that matpat never discussed in his FNAF 4 Video.
I think a lot of people look over the early games to support modern theories or hints on the lore later on. I wish more people review the early games to see if old hints still connect with new hints. Thank you for making this theory
2:55 mike being the one taking apart the animatronics and then william being the one who dies in springtrap is literally some purple guy pink guy bollocks if the logic you said at this part is true that means i could randomly claim the save them purple guy was phone guy trying to save the souls of the spirits, with no evidence.
Mike wearing promotional mask of the upcoming characters would make sense specially with ImmenseAndrew video talking about how he think the retcon was that FNaF 4 originally took place in 1982. Because of the two 1982s hidden in the source code taht nobody talks about. So the commercial on CC's TV would be a commercial for the new characters being add in the next year.
The protag of fnaf 4 can be furthur simplify by the fact that the nightmares are of the four main cast which the crying child were never afraid of, in fact he stated that they are his friend, and by process of elimination only Michael can be the protag
As a long time fan of this series, seeing stuff reframed the way it is in the video is mind blowing. It really makes things so much easier to follow with the first four games. Not to mention the genius idea of retracing the game through Scott steps, well done and incredible video
A lot of theorists hate looking at the franchise this way because... well it is kind of a mind-numbing chaotic tangle. But I think hindsight is our best weapon against that. We know NOW what the story was supposed to be, so lets go back through what we know and try to organize it in a way that makes sense, building along the way as we unpack each game. That's the way Scott wrote the story so, to me, that feels the most natural. I also don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of the games, so this keeps me from making unnecessary mistakes... For the most part, I still have no idea why I put that "two purple guys" shit in there
Wow. I uhhh, don’t even know what to write. There were so many new and interesting ideas brought up in this video. For a second, that comparison between “Was it me” and “IT’S ME” seemed really cold until I realised it would be “It was me”, so I still believe IT’S ME is CC talking to Mike or something else. Still so many of the ideas brought forward are so cool and interesting to think about. Nice video :3
22:03 but The bite of 87 was the reason for why animatronics weren’t allowed to free roam during the day anymore and Fredbear isn’t a free roam animatronic.
my biggest theory when it comes to the initial lore of fnaf is that when there was just 1 game, the bite of 87 was a joke either from the phone guy, or just from scott cawthon himself. the way its mentioned sounds so much like its just a prank being pulled on you to freak you out also im really iffy that the phone guys in fnaf 1 and 2 were supposed to be the same person at first. i imagine scott didnt figure hed need to get another voice until people started saying theyre the same person
I really appreciate the use of the soul eater soundtrack, Justin’s theme is so recognizable to me at this point that I heard the first few seconds and immediately knew it was
I have always been a huge fan of FNAF every since MatPat started making theories on it back in 2013.. ive always wanted to make my own.. i really love your video and your take on the story! Especially your theory that Mike could actually be working at freddies with his friends, i never thought of it that way! Great video, excited for more.
Thank you so much. I never expected the video to break 1k views and this comment alone nearly brought me to tears. I started the series just before FNAF 4, which is likely why that period of the franchise has stuck with me so much. I hope to keep making content that people find interesting, even if my conclusions seem unrealistic
I’ve been wrapped up in this series for the last 10 years & I love any video about old fnaf. But all that being said keep making videos on whatever you want. I like your style
I always had a feeling that FNAF 4 took place in ‘87 and that the TV show was just a throw off meant to show old reruns of Fredbears. And it was meant to show us, what happened. And that’s what caused Dream Theory, everything CC went through was exasperated because he had a brain injury. The rumors these kids ALL knew about clearly was just your average neighborhood spooky tales. Something akin to what they’d say about the creepy neighbor on the block. But the rumor turns out to be true, somewhat. After he gets bit, he becomes the biggest mystery: Golden Freddy. You have to remember, at the time, all people wanted answers to with FNAF was “what was the bite of 87” and “who did it” And that’s what solved the story. People always reference later games which makes zero sense because 4 was titled and slated to be the last game. So all evidence should be examined and presented only from 1-4
You are definitely going to grow in subscribers and wanting to say that your videos are coming out pretty well and very excited to see what you upload next. Golden Freddy was my favorite so you can imagine i immediately clicked this.
i like the way u refute theories like the golden freddy two lit eyes with logic by comparing the head to the other anamatronics. some people don’t be thinking Great Video
I'm honestly astounded you don't have more subscribers and views. Your video editing skills are great, your audio is great quality, and you have a comprehensive script and great way of speaking. Your effort doesn't go unnoticed!!
9:40 It’s a matter of time. I hadn’t read the Silver Eyes when it originally released but years after, and for me at least, I thought that first book was a decent story. That line is always the one people point out, but the rest of the contents of the book are okay. It’s not a bad story by any means.
i could totally imagine mike and his friends telling cc that the springlock animatrinics eat people. would help explain why the animatronics scare him but the plushies/characters dont
@@scorcher69 "these are my friends" is probably referring to the fact even when kids are abused, they often idolize their abusers but i like your interpretation just as much
The interview he did with Dawko like... A week after I uploaded the video confirms a lot of my ideas about Scott's approach to writing. I mean he literally made a JJ Abrhams mystery-box, Scott is many things but subtle is NOT one of them
@@USOGUl thats ok, if I knew the video was gonna get this much attention I would have spent more time on the script. That's why I'm taking so long with this next one
@@TheFlinchyDinosaur I was more referring to fnaf’s already convoluted lore than your explanation of it, but that’s still great to hear! Good luck and can’t wait to see it! :D
This is one of the few FNAF videos I could completely follow and understand. I 99% agree with everything said, it really makes you see how things were before with the 4 games we had. I was especially mind-blown by the CC's Brother and his pals being workers, and the mask having more reason to be there (I just thought they just bought and put on merch to scare the kid). Tho I'm still a hard believer that FNAF 4 gameplay is the CC in some nightmare-dream type shit where he confronts his fears and is finally able to move on. But meh, it's not the biggest thing so your video is still amazing to me.
You Forgot Mike (The One Having The Nightmares) Hearing Phone Guy's Calls During Them Which A)Means Is Anyone But The Crying Child (Since He's Dead AF And Never Heard Such Calls) B)The Nightmares Happen In A Different Time Period Than The Minigames, Since The Bite Happened In 83 While The Calls Way After 87
My only question is, If golden freddy was behind the bite of 87, how did it happen? Can't wait for the fnaf 2 episode as I think there is stuff people forget about the phone calls being prerecorded.
Eyo! Just wanted to note despite not being in the FNAF Fandom, while i am still out of my depth here you've laid out a pretty good narrative that on subsequent rewatches tend to help make everything have some sense to someone completely blind. PS, seriously, record yourself reading the phone book or dictionary plz, need more ASMR documentary/commentary stuff for my work playlist
Another point i add, When phone guy in fnaf 2 mentions un the call in night 5 or night 4 he says "We're going to try to get in contact with the original restaurant owner. I think the name of the place was (Fredbears family diner)? Or something like that." The phone guy is working for Fazbear entertainment & hes the phone guy he doesn't know his own employer? He also said the place has been closed for yrs there probably be no way track anyone down. He is aware the place is closed; he doesn't mention why it closed. That means the bite of 83 didn't close it. The murder of Charlotte closed Fredbears down. Not the bite. He never said why it closed he doesn't mention at all a bite that happened he just says its been closed for yrs. The point that bothers me is he works for the establishment; he doesn't know his own employer anyone who works at an establishment or workplace must know their employer when they first go for interview. He doesn't know one of his employers is the original owner of Fredbears family diner? He didn't even specify who is the original owner; he just said original restaurant owner. Anyone whom may have established this location in fnaf 2 hes working at the owner is Henry emily. Because he created Fredbears family diner & William starred next to it. The original location is not the fnaf 4 location. In the books the location is illustrated as small under budget location with small stage & wooden structure built un the outside. In the silver eyes book. Thats the location Charlotte was murdered outside at. Because cakebear is Fredbear & fredbear was once Freddy. Til they switched the two & made them their own separate individual identities. Freddy is fredbear, fredbear was freddy now he is golden Freddy. There is more than one animatronic mech for these robots. The first two in the stage 1 from Fnaf 3 are the original location freddy & Bonnie mechs. The mechs in the facility are the other opposite Mechs for freddy & Bonnie. Freddy had black hat & black bowtie in the original location; in the facility fredbear has purple hat & bowtie two different separate characters. Cake bear is the original Freddy. From Freddy Fazbears. Not pizza Freddy Fazbears diner. Or Fredbears family diner. The bite never happened at the original location. The murder was the reason why it closed. If the bite is why it closed the phone guy may have mentioned it. Un that phone call that night n date. The bite was not why. It never took place in the original location it happened in the facility. The murder of Charlotte is why the original location Fredbears family diner not connected to the facility; outside somewhere else is why it closed. After Charlotte died, henry grieved then he took measures & made Freddy Fazbears pizza. The murder of the five missing children took place after charlottes fate. Susie, Gabriel, fritz, Jeremy, and cassidy. Five! They possessed the originals then the first location closed & the 1987 one opened after because they tried retro fitting the old models with new technology but they rejected them & decided use Toy model kid friendly versions instead. Incorporated with the criminal database scan. And then they go haywire again & kill Jeremy un the day of the bite of 87. Thats the incident the public & the company recognizes. That bite. Not 1983. The five missing incident also another the company & the public recognizes. Because they know these animatronic robots aren't normal. They have dead corpse's & bodies in them. Until they removed them i assume. Thats the story n perception pitch i have. Good night!
Mike's friends are pretty big assholes against CC to be hired to play mascot characters for children. I know Fazbear is all about cutting corners, but I just can't see them being able to do that job. They also wouldn't wear just masks but full suits, which as you said aren't there.
@@covereye5731 there were never any suits of the core 4 ever across the entire franchise. But I see what you're saying about the bullying, it's a matter of perspective I guess. The way I see it, they're only bullying CC because of familiarity with Mike. Their lines suggest they don't know the kid that well, saying that they've HEARD he was a crybaby. Totally valid if you're not in that camp though
Definitely an interesting video overall, but I think there’s just too much evidence that the Fnaf 4 location is Fredbear’s and not Freddy’s. I think the big detail that you missed is during Fnaf 3’s phone calls where phone guy says “after an unfortunate incident at the sister location involving multiple and simultaneous springlock failures”. This is important for a few reasons Firstly, a “sister location” in business terms refers to a different brand owned by the same parenting company (for example Marvel and Star Wars are sister properties because they’re both owned by the same parent company, Disney). This means that Fazbear Entertainment owns another restaurant chain other than Freddy’s, and considering Fredbear’s is the only other restaurant we know of at the release of Fnaf 4, it just makes sense for that location to be Fredbear’s. This also means Freddy’s and Fredbear’s are open at the same time. Considering Fnaf 2 is called the reopening, I think it’s likely Freddy’s was open before 1987 so I don’t have an issue with the idea that it opens in 1983. But that also doesn’t mean that the Fnaf 4 location has to be that restaurant. Secondly, phone guy mentions a springlock failure taking place at the aforementioned sister location. This seems to be referring to the Fnaf 4 bite because there isn’t much else it could be referring to. Purple Guy hasn’t springlocked yet and either way he was springlocked in a Freddy’s location (remember the sister location phone guy mentioned cannot be a Freddy’s). The only other time we see any kind springlock suit fail is when Fredbear chops down on crying child. Even if you think it wasn’t the springlocks themselves it was still a springlock suit that caused this event. Which either means that this springlock failure phone guy mentions is an event we never see (which seems like a weirdly important event to never expand on ever again), or the Fnaf 4 location is the sister location, with the springlock failure being the Fnaf 4 bite. Which would also mean the Fnaf 4 location is not a Freddy’s. Thirdly, if the Fnaf 4 location is a Freddy’s, where is Freddy? Again we know Freddy’s and a sister location are open at the same time. If this was a Freddy’s, why is Fredbear the centrepiece of the restaurant, even being the only one featured on the outside of the building? Like you said we never see a trace of the Fnaf 1 characters at this restaurant. It makes considerably more sense that this is Fredbear’s while Freddy’s is open elsewhere at the same time. Also if the Fnaf 4 location is a Freddy’s then where’s pirate cove? We know that Foxy exists by this point and yet the Fnaf 4 location doesn’t have his signature space. And just because it doesn’t look like a diner in the mini game doesn’t mean it isn’t one. You said yourself in this video that the mini games don’t always reflects the layout or look. Overall it seems much more likely that the Fnaf 4 location is Fredbear’s with Freddy’s being a sister location also open at the same time. Considering we know from phone guy that a sister location to Freddy’s exists at this time, there just isn’t any other restaurant that makes sense other than Fredbear’s. Also remember that Scott likes to clarify things in his next game, so having this location in Fnaf 4 could be one way of clarifying what location the tape in Fnaf 3 was referring to. Lastly I direct you to one of the teaser images Scott posted before Fnaf 4’s release, depicting a purple top hat under a spotlight. If you brighten up the image, in the corner you make fill in the sentence “property of Fredbear’s family diner”, the only character we ever see with a purple top hat in these games is Fredbear from the Fnaf 4 location. I still think this video presents a lot of interesting points (people don’t talk about Golden Freddy’s jumpscare with 1987 nearly enough) but I don’t think this idea of it is correct.
This is all under the assumption that the FNAF 4 bite is a springlock failure. It's not. The suit is in animatronic mode, and thus the springlocks are not locked and cannot unlock or "fail". There's no animatronic parts to slide back into place, they're already in place
As I said “Even if you think it wasn’t the springlocks themselves it was still a springlock suit that caused this event.” Wether or not it was an actual springlock failure we know the Fnaf 4 bite is what phone guy is referring to because there’s nothing else he could be talking about. He talks about an incident at a sister location, aka a restaurant that is not Freddy Fazbears Pizza. The only restaurant chain we know about besides Freddy’s is Fredbear’s, so either Scott created an unnamed sister restaurant of Freddy’s that is never brought up anywhere besides this one mention, or Fredbear’s is a sister locations of Freddy’s that is open at the same time. He then mentions a spring lock failure at said location. The only 2 instances of a springlock suit causing harm to someone that we know of are Purple Guy getting turned into Springtrap and the Fnaf 4 bite. Obviously it’s far too early for the former to happen (not to mention it happened at a Freddy’s location) which only leaves the Fnaf 4 bite. Again either Scott created a springlock failure that we never learn more about and never gets mentioned again, or it’s referring to the Fnaf 4 bite (remember Scott likes to add to and clarify in his next game). However we also know this springlock failure does not happen at a Freddy location. Which means it happens at thr sister location, Fredbear’s, which then also means that the Fnaf 4 location is Fredbear’s Family Diner, not Freddy Fazbears Pizza. And this was only one of my points in my comment. If this is a Freddy’s location why isn’t there any trace of Freddy or the other Fnaf 1 characters anywhere in this location? Why is Fredbear the star of the show if this isn’t his restaurant? Why would Scott release a Fnaf 4 teaser image that shows the same purple hat Fredbear wears in the game which also directly name drops Fredbear’s Family Diner if it was in no way going to be present in the game? And if the sister location isn’t Fredbear’s and the springlock failire isn’t the bite, it leaves open more questions. We know for certain that Freddy’s and some other restaurant chain are open at the same time thanks to phone guy. Why would Scott create an important location and event that never gets mentioned again?
I'm currently too far into editing my next video to include this comment in it so I'll address it here. The wording used is "Springlock failure" and the books very specifically describe what a Springlock Failure entails. It is honestly far more likely that there are several Springlock Failures that we just never see in the games than it is likely that they use the wrong word to describe an accident. Especially since lying in that way would only serve to implicate the company more because, as you acknowledged, none of the Springlocks actually failed. Plus, FNAF started out with a lot of dark comedy about how nonchalant the corporation is about death. I totally believe that there are just tons of employee Springlock Failures we don't know the specifics of.
Excellent video! I must say that it is, in my opinion, the closest explanation to the true history of FnaF, but after studying and watching this series of games and most of its theories, I think I can conclude that... Scott's goal was always for Mike to be the real killer of the saga... since as you say, William Afton was never mentioned since that name is canon in the books and despite the fact that they are taken as a reference for the games, that name was never mentioned... Therefore the famous phrase "I will put you back together"... the only one who could have said it to CC is him... and it would be the perfect reason to become the serial killer of the series and I think with that we could answer that the contents of the box... was at the beginning... CC's body... I feel that it is not so crazy to think of it this way.
Near the beginning you say that Scott wanted to associate 1987 with golden freddy because of the 1987 jumpscare in the custom night. But wasn't custom night added way after fnaf 1 released? Also, wasn't Fnaf 1 gonna be Scott's final game when he first released it?
FNAF 1 had custom night at launch afaik (letsplays indicate the mode predates FNAF 2 if nothing else). I can't find anything online to suggest otherwise so if you see something please link it. In any case, I don't think this actually disproves what I said. Scott still put the Easter egg into the game. Even if I don't think he had the franchise planned out, I do think that he had this thought in his head "the bite of 87, oooo that sounds spooky and mysterious... Oooo! Wait I have a super mysterious animatronic! What if when you put in 1987, it gives the player a lil jump scare? That's smart! That's really creepy and will get people wondering 'whats with the bite of 87'" which is exactly what happened lol Edit: I looked at the releases and while custom night has always been in the game, the 1987 input jumpscare was added to quell rumors of a secret ending. I think my point stands though, the 1987 input jumpscare was added more than 3 months before FNAF 2 came out
11:29 Yo, that's not a fredbear costume. Nah, but for real, I love this video. I've always hated that whenever people theorise about fnaf they always use the past fnafs in the way they do
Am I the only one who thinks that the 1983 on the TV screen references when Freddy's opened and not the year of the game like most TM and all rights reserve stickers do
13:17 There is no evidence to say that they work there. All of that evidence is circumstantial and doesn't even prove your point. Also kids not your age going to your birthday party is very possible. Especially if you're homeschooled.
I'm giving you a like just for pointing out that Golden Freddy's second eye is just the light from the other socket spilling over. It irked me to no end how Matpat popularized that stupid thing.
Ooo, very interesting! I love seeing theories about the first few games, before the lore got as complicated as it is now. It's kind of crazy how simple it all used to be back then, even if some stuff wasn't entirely solved by the fandom at the time. Also, may I ask what music was used at 19:07?
I always like to think originally the character that is fredbear was just the crying child imaginary friend and the bear on stage isn’t exactly how we see it for example the names of restaurants and characters don’t always have to be connected like showbiz pizza billy bob the bear isn’t named Billy showbiz the bear not to mention when your that young you like to imagine things a lot for example a kid could imagine his Mickey Mouse plush was wearing blue shorts and that his name is tommy not to mention the minigames aren’t always literal and sometimes symbolic but that’s just a theory A GAME THEORY
I haven't played the games yet, but isn't Golden Freddy solely possessed by the Crying Child whose name is probably Cassidy? Pretty sure there's theories suggesting that Cassidy is the crying child.
The leading theory, made by Dual Process Theory, is hotly contested and it's still too soon to say one way or another. Regardless, they came to that conclusion with information from the Security Logbook, something that would not come out until much later. Therefore, since I'm working with evidence from the first 4 games, I can't come to that conclusion. All you gotta do is count the deaths, 5 MCI + 1 CC = 6 dead kids and 5 animatronics for them to possess.
@@TheFlinchyDinosaur Dual Process Theory does a good job of presenting their theory. Besides it could be revealed that the crying child could be the 5th MCI kid and the sixth kid is Charlie. I wouldn't be surprised if a newer game starts leaning in that direction either. I haven't watched the FNAF movie, but I wouldn't be surprised if they reveal the boy possessing golden Freddy was Vanessa's younger brother, Cassidy. Yet I find theories to be interesting despite not fully agreeing with them. If I ever find the time to play the FNAF games I would likely craft my own theory more or less. Yet, there are more mysteries that pop up with every new entry to FNAF it seems.
That's the leading theory but I don't really think the crying child is Cassidy just because he is not a vengeful spirit and Afton didn't kill him either. Cassidy (vengeful spirit) and Crying child are two different entities. Are they inside Golden Freddy, I don't know hahaha maybe. Maybe the crying child follows golden Freddie around as a lost soul without body since golden Freddy has always been his friend. But yeah, the theory is pretty cool but the Crying child was not killed by afton therefore cannot be the vengeful spirit that trapped Afton in FNAF Custom Night. I am pretty sure the vengeful spirit must be within Golden Freddy since you can see it tweaking when you beat the most difficult game in FNAF 6.
Honestly, i think the “Four Games One Story” is probably a dream theory, like if you put all parts together, it makes sense, Fnaf Dream Theory is better elaborated than Ash Coma Theory for example 😅. And i think Scott didn’t planned a “long run” for FNaF franchise and miss calculated some “dates” like the 1987 and 1983, and contradict himself sometimes. Edit: IMO, that Steam quote for Scott “Some things should be forgotten” (i think is that quote) he fears the massive fandom rejection about be a dream theory, like “all that rich story just to become a dream theory, what a waste of time”
If most of the games are all dreams, than it’s 4 games 2 stories. It tells us 1 story about a series of murders that happened at a pizza chain that caused animatronic characters to become possessed, and a second story about a scared kid who got bit and had nightmares. This quote was revealed when Matpat started discussing if fnaf2 was a dream during the livestream, and what else could Scott have been trying to tell us other than that Matpat was wrong?
I still believe in my theory: that the Bite of 87’s date was retconned into being 1983 instead. I believe this because: 1. I think there being two bites would be completely destroy Fazbear Entertainment beyond the point of possible recovery, as while the company could claim that they had nothing to do with multiple kids going missing, and claim somebody stole the suit to lure the kids away, and one bite could be chalked up to a mechanical error, there being a second bite creates a pattern that Fazbear Entertainment cannot claim is not their fault anymore, as it was their own animatronic programming both times. 2. A lot of what you said in this video. Golden Freddy/Fredbear was clearly being set up both by the teasers and the game itself. Plus, even though the FNAF 1 custom night 1987 easter egg was only added because of fan rumors, I do think it influenced Scott’s decision to make Fredbear the one to do the bite. 3. Before SL was released, Scott said that all of the pieces needed to solve the story were in the first four games, and the bite was clearly something that Scott considered important (unlike Afton’s identity, which this video made me realize), and since, even to this day, we still can’t really nail down a specific animatronic if there is a second bite, which leads me to the conclusion that, at least at the time, whether it be through dream theory or a retcon, that was supposed to be the bite of 87.
@@everettlatte4913 shut up shut up shut up this is not happening. People from my highschool are NOT being recommended my content. I refuse to believe it's come this far
@@Joshua_Sachs yeah, I totally don't stand by the 2 purple guys thing anymore to be honest, at least not in THIS stage of Scott's writing. This era of FNAF was all about roles and not named characters so purple guy was probably just the serial killer and not secretly 2 people
Ok the only part I disagree with is Fredbears vs Freddys, and I think youare missing the point. You say it snot Freadbears but only facilitates the animatronics, but that doesn't account for many things. 1) the minigames and Freadbears being pre-haunting requires the location to be only depicable in minigames, and its wierd for Scott to bring up this location in FNAF 2 with no intent to use it later on or have it appear if fans want that. )Scott loves appealing ot fans, its the whole reason FNAF 4 exist. 2) One of the teasers says "Property of FreaBears family diner if you fill in the blanks, and it can't be anything esle because blocking out Fazbears pizza would be pointless and irrelevant. 3) The dinner not looking like a dinner is irrelevant. Either Scott didn't really care what it looked like, or givn the we know Freadbears was open at the same time as a Fredy's thanks to the cassets in FNAF 3, they could have just remodeled the place to be more like their syster restaraunt given how by this time it was likely owned by Fazbear entertainment as opposed to just William and Henry. 4) In FNAF 3 ti says that they moved the two springlocks to a Freddys location after multiple springlock failures, which likely references the bite of 83 and the locks failing, chomping donw on the kid. Why would Fazbear entertainment move the suits form a Freddy's location... to a Freddys location? Its odd and doesn't make any sense. Besides we never hear of a location explicitly said to house these two that isn't called Freadbears. All w eknow is Freadbears came first, the original FNAF location opened later on while it was still open, Freadbears closed and shiped the suits to it, and then the original FNAF location closed, leading to a reopening later on as we see in fnaf 2. You are assuming we have a brand new location based on the look of a game, and not anything that is actually said. People in FNAF tend to make more and more complex theories to explain away and solv emysteries long unanswered, but it leads them to make more and more leaps. (Look at MatPats final fnaf theory which I think is mor einnacurate than his early ones because he makes more and more leaps to make his own narrative tahn stick to hard facts) Until we as a community outlike hard canon facts, we cannot assume or go off into tangents like this because it makes people miss the point. FNAF is more or less simple in Scotts eyes, and things like what you outlined just don't make sense and would have been elluded to by Scott in some semi-direct way. Its how he works. He gives us stuff that we may interpret incorrectly, but the baseline should be simple. This is two yellow suits, and its takin place in 1983 because we know in fnaf 2 Freadbears is long gone to the point phone guy barely remembers it and the suits are out of commission. There is no way about it. Anything else is denial, and you as yourself said minigames can be accurate, and Scott is very much likes to do things that he thinks are cool. Makin the dinner look all pretty and stuff is likely him just thinking what a party looks like and the coolest or most fitting look would be what we see in fnaf 4. This isn't speculation, tis why different animatronics get new models and designs each game; Scott likes keeping things fresh and cool even if it may not always be the best for canon. Look at FNAF 2 where the fnaf 1 animatornics have different designs, yet he uses the fnaf 1 designes in some cutsceees with the puppet. it doesn't always line up with basic logic, but thats just how Scott works sometimes. He isn't a professional writer, he is just doing his best and details like the look of a dinner are far from his priority list compared to small hidden details like toy chica missing her beak, which are far more important because they are actually hidden, not just a set piece.
The source code was the same across all the teasers. I used the wayback machine to look at source code during the period FNAF 4 promos were up and none of them mentioned Fredbear's. Also, Scott constantly ignores what the fans care about; case and point Purple Guy. You say the community needs to stay rooted in fact but the only fact you actually gave me is something I can't verify. The rest of your comment is just baseless conjecture based on super circumstantial evidence. Your entire argument boils down to "it would be weird if it wasn't Fredbear's" and I agree with that. When I was writing this theory the original script called it Fredbear's, but everything; from the year, to the location's look, to the characters it promotes screams Freddy Fazbears Pizza and NOT Fredbear's. If we were to hold other theories to your standard nothing would get done.
@@TheFlinchyDinosaur I never said anything about the source code, I mean teh actual Freadbear teasers. The hadone says property of FreadBears Family dinner, and the Nightmare Freadbear one says property of me (Freadbear.) ITs pretty specific in terms of this being in Freadbears. Also while the source code does have a lot f 87s in it, it also does have 83s. Not as many, but it does.
@@TheFlinchyDinosaur yea there is. Just look it up. It's in black and white with a purple bow tie. Don't believe me look for in in the Scott's game archive yourself.
@@shinymk6562 I just took a look and while I don't think you're inventing teasers I do think you're misremembering/misunderstanding them. You are mixing two teasers together. The first teaser that comes to mind matches the wording you're referring to super closely. It features a hat and bowtie on the floor in a spotlight with tiny text that says "property of Fr" and then a massive gap before the letters "er" at the end. You could make the argument that Fredbear satisfies these constraints but only if you only learned about this teaser from text and not actually looking at it. The gap between Fr and Er is WAY too big to be "Fredbear" and is likely "Freddy Fazbear". If Fredbear is being specifically called out here, then this seems like more of an implication that the original name for the Fredbear animatronic was not originally Fredbear but some variant of Freddy Fazbear (you'll notice the font corroborates the number of missing characters). The next teaser which more accurately fits the imagery you're describing features Nightmare Fredbear with the text "Or was it me?" and then in much tinier text there are some words near the chest cavity. First, you can see an indistinguishible letter followed by an "R", then a tooth and the letters "pro" followed by a large gap and "me" which could honestly mean anything. Seriously, look before the "pro" at the very least there's some form of indistinguishable writing before it thefnafarchive.org/teasers/fullimg/21/ The order of the teasers also corroborates my theory that Fredbear's name changed over the course of FNAF 4's development. Remember, the point of these videos is trying to understand what the story was as Scott told it.
this is probably the best theory ive heard. really looking at it from a different standpoint BEFORE the newer era of fnaf really sheds a different light on the game. taking it from scott’s perspective and just making it as obvious as it is is right. other theorists were digging too deep when they know 1-4 are completely separate and their own story compared to SL-HW2. i think other, bigger theorists should see this
There is too much conjecture in this theory! You assume Scott did or didn’t plan out certain things without explaining why you think so or providing evidence. I think Scott planned out Fredbear’s as early as fnaf 2 because that’s the game where it was established and given the name Fredbear’s Family Diner! It was eluded to mysteriously and vaguely by purple guy, so why would Scott add it to the game without having an idea for why it exists???
You must not have watched my video. And you know, I could forgive that, but you're also conflating phone guy with purple guy as if it's a fact that they're the same person, which I have 0 respect for considering you just told me my therapy has too much conjecture (something I actually agree on even if I think your reasons are half-baked). 1) I said Scott had planned Fredbear's Diner in FNAF 2 so I'm not sure what inaccuracy you think you're correcting. 2) Scott said we had already found everything in the games. If there was additional details and lore he would not have specifically gone out of his way to say that we found all of it for FNAF 1-3.
Apologies, I'll try to be better about renders going forward, but it's incredibly difficult and this is literally the first video I've edited on my own
It's an unfortunate fact, but the community doesn't like to talk about it. Personally, I think it's a good thing to make fun of people who donate large amounts of money to despicable causes. People should do that more
I doubt any of you are actually old enough to vote, first of all. Second, the money Scott’s contributed to LGBTQ organizations far outweigh any he’s given to Trump. And third, you’re still fans of a series created and developed by Scott, and Flinchy is making a theory video about it. Clearly it’s not too sobering or painful of a reminder
@@J.G.Quintel I think you're being a little bit disingenuous by saying his contributions to LGBTQ+ organizations "outweighs" those given to Trump. But like, all in all, its not a big deal, I still like the funny bear franchise. I just don't like looking away from the ugly parts of a creator just because I love their work. I also despise putting creative minds on a pedestal. Lets not pretend that "scary Chuck E. Cheese" is a crazy idea, it had been a pretty established trope in Cartoons before FNAF came along and that wide appeal has contributed massively towards the series' success. Only Scott Cawthon could have made FNAF the special and unique franchise it is today, but that doesn't mean he's some savant either. I respect him as a creative but I don't respect his political beliefs and I don't feel the need to pull my punches when it comes to mocking them. Edit: Also, I'm 21. I don't appreciate the notion that because you got triggered like a snowflake over a relatively lighthearted joke, that I'm somehow a child? Super weird behavior.
Why does him being a trump suporter mater that much? You guys act like that makes him unclean. Obviously you respect him to some degree,why does Trump have to effect how you view a guy you respect?
I will give it you about the Diner part. No its not diner, its pizza joint. Heres the prospect where everything changes: are you ready? SISTER LOCATION IS CONNECTED TO FREDBEARS! Its not real place. It never was. It was testing facility for his victims his targets. He experimented & studied them while they were down there. Are you going tell me its that impossible sister location isnt tied to fnaf 4. Look at the layout of the facility all the rooms that are the fnaf 4 layout are tied n connected behind walls of the facility. Its not real. Its an illusion experiment facility chamber for the purple man do his research & study them. Hes Been doing this all along. He doesn't care whomever is down there, hes craft scientific genius with brain studying the living & the dead. He purposely planned out all their fates. The funtimes are his tools for killing & using rem to conduct eternal life immortality. The scooper is created to extract & inject rem into the bodies of the robots. And people. Michael Afton an example. Even the purple man himself. I don't believe the child is tied to the purple guy; i believe a different alternative. Sammy emily. Instead of Charlotte getting kidnapped he took sammy emily away from henry & raised adopted him as his own son & used him. Or he may infact be random kid he found un the streets somewhere lost in the middle of nowhere & took him in & adopted him. Making Michael his not real biological brother his step brother. And Elizabeth afton may in fact be the one of the siblings mike has, and Vanessa is another sibling making Elizabeth & her twin sisters the mother probably ran out un the father took Vanessa away while William had liz & mike; since liz was lonely he intended find suitable replacement for Liz's age so she can have someone play with. Who did he get her? A young boy. That boy was her step brother. And he is the bite victim because the family is f**ked up. I don't perceive it was always bad. Unless the purple guy has very depressing backstory of his own & then as he got older he met his wife & started business outside his facility then partnered with henry make restaurant about animatronics & entertainment. Nobody knows what happened to the purple guys side of the story. What made him become this monster of man. Create machines to kill & extract rem, study life & immortality, even go un rampage & kill. Nobody knows the backstory of the purple guy theres never been one. I do perceive the concept of the bite of 87 being the incident the public remembers Freddy Fazbears pizza for not Fredbears family diner. The bite of 83 or 82, took place in aftons facility. It wasn't real it was made up concept to illusion people make believe its real yeah its real it turns out No. Its just one big experiment game mess with your head. The real Fredbears family diner i believe is not tied to the facility the restaurant itself is outside the facility. Theres more than one fredbear & bonnie mech: the real location is where Charlotte emily died. While his son or his adopted son died in his facility from fredbear in his facility. Because mike. And i do believe Liz's death wasn't an accident either. He planned for that happen too. Even he intended Mike be scooped in sister location i do believe. Afton knew if he were get caught it be the end of the road for him, he may have committed the murders; they didn't catch him in the act of doing it they caught someone else. He framed somebody for his doings then he paid the long awaited punishment for it. Death by his own do. Yeah sure windup the old rickedy looking spring suit in the abandoned decaying Freddy's safe room then climb inside & not expect the surprise karma experience. He got it coming to him. The bite of 83 may not have been public, thats why i perceive its the difference the public may remember because they saw it happen in 1987 the guard Jeremy Fitzgerald he got bit. He was attacked. The public saw it. The bite of 83 it may have gotten covered up & nobody saw it. Nobody was there witness it theres no memory or evidence because its not real place. Just if Circus Baby's pizza isn't real place because it never happened. When the boy died, the purple guy may sure hide it. He did. And thats why its never brought up its secret hidden away & covered up hide the truth. He did that. When he killed Charlotte he hid the evidence he did it. Nobody knew. It was covered up & hidden away.. thats the story of fnaf. In fnaf 4 & fnaf 2 its difference who remembers vs whom doesn't. The public saw n knows the bite of 87 happened. Phone guy talks about it, he knows about it. He never once said there was another that occurred. See?? Bite of 83 ooh.. nobody saw it, nobody remembers it. It was covered up & hidden. Its not public in the restaurant itself its in aftons own facility right next to circus Babys entertainment and rentals. Thats why its never mentioned. Its false memory made believe it didn't happen when it did. This is mind f*dging with you. Thats it does. Fudges with your brain. I said fudge because I don't like the term you know i said. The opposite is bad. There you have it; sister location & fnaf 4 are connected. No its not dream. Its real. And the nightmares are just experimental fear chamber robots get back at mike for the boy that died in Fredbears jaw. I don't know if they're both related real it may be another hole gap that is left uncertive. Maybe they aren't they're just step bros. And they don't like each other thats why he cries alot. Because its not his real family or this family is just cruel and mean he doesn't wan be there he doesn't belong.
I very much enjoy your way of approaching things, you don't reach far and you consider how things would have been made back when they were made. It's much like how I like to view the games and somehow it's kind of rare in the fnaf space. I think it's out of a desire to find a way to make everything seem perfect, planned out and like one big story? Not sure.
