The Crying Child WAS the Puppet (SAVE HIM) 

Just confirmed that yes, "87" was hidden in the source code during the original Fnaf 4 teasers, confirming that too is a retcon. This just makes the fact that Ennard became Molten Freddy in the source code even more egregious. XD

Retcons aren’t inherently bad. Scott wanting to explore new ideas that might conflict with older canon isn’t inherently bad. But it all depends on execution. And it’s a bad habit we’ve cultivated as a fanbase, to try and sandpaper over all the rough bumps and blemishes that these retcons have inflicted on the canon. there’s nothing wrong with recognizing his stumbles as a storyteller while still appreciating the parts that resonate with us.

If i could describe FNAF's story in one word it would be: Frustrating

I'll never understand why people think the story hasn't changed or has always been planned out from the start, like... Scott somehow planed to have sentient robot mechas in his horror franchise about how chuck E cheese is freaky. Scott has retconed and changed lots of stuff, the puppet included, and the lore would be less frustrating if he would just communicate what has been thrown out. Like I'm not saying he should give us a full timeline planned out to the detail, or even give us more hints about anything that is canon, but just come out and say 'Oh yeah, this was planned to be this but I scrapped it' about some stuff...

Honestly, I think you SHOULD talk about this stuff. If it bothers you, sharing your thoughts is important. Especially because the Puppet IS one of those underrated characters that was built up then up and left behind so callously. Agree or disagree, at least people will listen to you and see what you have to say. Hell, I like the Puppet being talked about again. That poor kid given some regards. I dunno, I just found this awesome writer one day and the Puppet was suddenly one of my favorites ^^

Fnaf 1-3 should have been their own contained story, The Story about the 5 kids becoming Freddy, Bonnie, Chica, Foxy, Golden Freddy, and the crying child being the puppet. Fnaf 4, World, Sister Location, Pizzeria and Ultimate Custom Night should have been their own contained story, the story of the Afton Family. From Help Wanted to now should be its own contained story, the Vannie/GlitchTrap story. Trying to fit these 3 story lines into one completely broke the timeline and made the earlier entries lesser by implying some didn't happen or retconning well established things. Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.

I completely forgot that crying child was messaged SO hard for being the puppet. The only information that shows he’s golden Freddy is his toy and how he died. There’s a lot more for him being the puppet.

I think that most people assume that the CC died at the end of FNaF 4 due to the fact that you can hear a heart rate monitor flatline in the background while the Fredbear plush is talking to the CC at the end of the game.

You bring up a good point most people don’t want to admit that the story changed or even switched around. But to be completely honest Scott probably had a vague idea of what he was making probably around five nights for and definitely he had a solid enough idea what the story was going to be at sister location. Which is where everything begins to switch around

Given when FNaF 4 came out, I also feel that it's likely the Crying Child might have orginally been Sammy. It would make sense, as in The Silver Eyes, which worked as a standalone novel for some time, we never learn what happened to Sammy, simply that he was taken. Of course, Twisted Ones, and the Fourth Closet crushed this notion and it seems that the games are trying to imply that they Crying Child is instead connected to the Aftons. Of course, it's never fully acknowledged or explained, leaving us in limbo. Yay. I really don't believe Scott when he says that he only made *one* big retcon.

Scott reconning the games to shill the books and matpat playing into it was the worst thing to have ever happened to this franchise

You can't trust Scott's word for anything. He is CONSTANTLY retconning and rewriting the story of this bloated beast of a storyline.

This kinda shows how Scott didn’t write the story ahead of time and instead made things up along, I think 2-world were planned and then as demand for more games rose he had to somehow continue the story and make it make sense

So, the thesis here is that the original story of the games was this: Fnaf 4 happens. Its much more straight forward than most people imagine. It was the bite of 87. They were just nightmares during the gameplay. The crying child became the puppet. The crying child is overwhelmingly most likely not an Afton. In fact, the name Afton does not exist, and neither does Michael. The lockbox contains some sort of evidence that the crying child was the puppet. Fnaf 2 happens. You're not playing as the son of the purple guy trying to figure things out, you're just a security guard trying not to die. Children die, haunting the Toy Animatronics, but other than that, nothing monumental happens in terms of long term storytelling other than seeing how the crying child, the puppet, is bringing the dead children to life. Fnaf 1 happens. You're just a security guard trying not to die. No major long term storytelling significance other than hearing about the Missing Children's incident. Fnaf 3 happens. Springtrap is purple guy. Purple guy has no canonically defined real name, nor known motive. He's just a kidnapper, not a mad scientist. Overwhelmingly likely NOT an owner of Freddy's of any kind, rather, as FNAF 2 suggests, he was a security guard. He died getting springlocked after fnaf 1. There are no funtimes, or remnant, or manipulating soul infused metal, or illusion discs. The happiest day set the children's souls free. The end.......but Springtrap is still out there as seen in the final newspaper clipping. This is a much cleaner story, and a lot more plausible one for him to have written when you consider how quickly he made these games. He didn't have the time to write a complicated and weaving decade long mystery of esoteric clues, and he wasn't really a writer to begin with anyway so expecting him to have done so would have been odd. Its interesting to think of the franchise in this light. I wish I could remember the video, but I heard a content creator say recently in a lore video about Security Breach "the heart of the franchise is the Afton family" and I thought "What? It is?". The first trilogy of games contain no hint that an Afton family even *exists* yet they were the ones who spawned the franchise. I understand why Scott rewrote his story the way that he did. The fanbase is built on lore theorists, and the lore theorists nearly universally had dramatically more complicated stories dreamed up in their heads than what actually existed. If he didn't rewrite the story, the revelation would be a disappointment. I wonder where we would be now if Scott had kept the story of 1-4 as they were, and just kicked off FNAF 5 with an almost entirely new plotline unrelated to the MCI or purple guy. Instead of Sister Location being dedicated to weird scientific explanations about the secret true protagonist of the franchise being a zombie possessing his own corpse, it could just have been focusing entirely on Circus Baby *as a person*. All the previous non-springtrap anomatronics were sympathetic figures. You're on Bonnie and Chica's side, you just don't want to die. Circus Baby could have been a new direction for the haunted animatronics. A haunted attraction that talks to you, that understands what its doing......

FNAF 4 in general is frustrating, but yes the crying child was supposed to be the puppet. The child, like all children with imagination, "gives life" to his toys for Pete's sake. It's a shame F4 went the way it did and then was retconned so hard.

Henry Emily and Charlie weren't planned in 2014, so most likely, the soul possessing puppet would be a random boy's soul

I always liked the idea of the crying child being the Puppet. If I could rewrite Fnaf, then I'd make that canon

I honestly liked FNAF's story a lot more when I thought that CC became the Puppet, because not only to me it helped tie the 4 games together into a comprehensable story, but also add a layer of depth to both characters that I could sort of, fully understand. Ever since that connection has been lost with the ever evolving story of FNAF we have now, that has sort of been ruined for me as, now I've been left feeling like CC is just chalked up as a useless plot device that's only purpose of having his own leading role in the 4th game was to die, never be mentioned again within outside speculation about being a hiding second spirit inside Golden Freddy, and still having confusion about what The Puppet is supposed to be, and what their motivations are (which is a whole other bag of worms, I don't really want to elaborate on in this already super long paragraph). This video gave me the closure I needed on this subject, because I really felt this is where the story was going, with all the clues and stuff, until Charlie was introduced and things went on from there. When I heard Scott saying "that the contents of the box changed over time", even though that sentence was as vague as it was and most definetly applied for other elements in the original FNAF story, my thoughts did go towards this original theory I once believed in, but it wasn't enough for me to not feel gaslit into thinking Charlie was always supposed to be a character, and The Puppet was always supposed to be her. So thank you for making this video, it's good to know I'm not the only one here that saw these details, and have similar thoughts towards it.

Also, I think you are right about the crying child and the puppet. The facts are here and we cannot ignore them. The story changed, the characters changed and the old simply dosn't work with the new. At least not all of it. Good content by the way. Like your vids:)

The Crying Child And Crying Child could somehow possess the Puppet at once. How? Charlie can be the One controlling puppets personality and voice,and The crying child was the One attacking and moving.

I'm glad you covered it again because I really prefer the narration to the TTS.

So, I do think that the Puppet was originally meant to be the Crying Child from FNaF 4 all under what Scott had originally intended the story of FNaF 4 to be. I don't know if the story of FNaF 1-3 was originally meant to tie into 4 specifically (maybe it always was, but we know Scott didn't intend to make FNaF 4 until he received backlash for the jumpscares in FNaF 3), but it definitely feels like he found a way a tie everything together in a way that made sense with the original idea being Dream Theory. I know there's probably people who wouldn't have accepted Dream Theory, but I do 100% believe that was where Scott was trying to go. The Crying Child being the Puppet also makes sense in this theory. The Puppet was the one who "gave life" to the animatronics. Going off of Dream Theory, the events of the first three games were all dreams or make-believe events made up in the mind of the Crying Child. His toys would have been the stand in for the animatronics, and he would be the person who gave them "life." There was also that one quote by Scott about the box where he said people must have thought he filled FNaF 4 with random Easter Eggs, but he didn't. If he outright indicates that FNaF 4 wasn't filled with random Easter Eggs, then how do you explain the photo of HIMSELF and his family inside of the FNaF 4 house? Because phone guy was the voice of the Crying Child's father. Maybe his dad was playing along with his games the entire time before the Crying Child misunderstood what he saw in the shadows (a "body" being "stuffed" into a suit) which is where his nightmares started. I personally think that the story would have been fine this way, but I do think the community became so invested into the story that they wouldn't have accepted it at the time.

Purple guy being a serial killer is actually really really scary. They really do exist, terrifying.... the theories about William Afton be a mad scientist experimenting with "Remnant" and "agony," it's fine and all, but purple guy just hanging around pizza parlors, praying on little ones was actually heart stopping.

Maybe the Puppet was originally meant to be Sammy Charlie's twin brother from the novel trilogy

Whoa whoa whoa, I know this is my second post here, but I was just going about my business when I had a potentially very significant thought. On the famed Game Theory livestream where Scott dropped in and gave hints, he said "What is seen in the shadows is often misunderstood in the eyes of a child" and "what is the significance of the toy Chica missing her beak?" Crying child is the puppet answers both of these. He saw humans being put in animatronic suits and thought people were being killed. This is not evidence of dream theory, it shows where Crying Puppet got its concept of putting the children's souls in the animatronics. The toy chica on the ground in the fnaf 4 mini game isn't evidence that fnaf 2 is a dream. Its showing us that the creator of *Haunted* Toy Chica, Crying Puppet, was imprinting his ideas of these characters into their essence when he "gave gifts, gave life". It even explains the pieces of a toy Mangle on the floor. The Puppet is recreating what it knows as it gives gifts.

I kinda wish the books and games overlapped less. The books were said to have been separate from the games (only a few details properly overlapped and those were fine).

It's not just the fact that the Crying Child seemed to have died in FNAF4 that gets in the way of him being in the SAVE HIM minigame. It's the fact that if the FNAF4 bite was indeed originally the bite of 87 and kept as such, then it's literally not possible for CC to be Puppet because the Puppet already existed and gave life to the original core 4 at some point prior to 1987 and the grand reopening in FNAF2. If anything, it makes way more sense that the visual and thematic similarities in FNAF4 simply connect CC to the existing spirit of the Puppet, who then turns out to be the one speaking to him through the Fredbear plush (I don't know why, lol) and tying his spirit to Fredbear/GF to "put him back together". Which was also a popular theory at the time, and would fix the existing issues here. Alas, I'm willing to bet Scott definitely forgot that in the first game, he established that William killed five children in the backroom and then established that the five souls went to the core 4 and Golden Freddy, which meant that the Golden Freddy child could not have been a tragic victim of Fredbear, and thus the whole plot got derailed. So cue the hasty retcons.

I like how the tears streaming down the crying child’s cheeks match the pippets stripes on their mask

Honestly, that theory of the crying child being the puppet was an actual thing back in the day, if my memory doesn't fail me, (and this is my personal opinion) it was changed because the majority of the fan base at the time (including myself) didn't like the crying child being the puppet. We were dead set on the Save Them mini-game being origins and crying child being an Aften(keep in mind the story was a less convoluted in that time) It made logical sense at the time, it was a SIMPLE story about a tragic family, and that was the narrative..... uuuuuntil it wasn't

The crying child is frustratingly underrated. He should've been the main character, instead of Michael.

So what do you think: You think the game’s story would’ve worked better if Evan was the Puppet instead of Charley? It would impact Henry’s motives but it could add a bit of visual consistency

Great video as always! I've always thought that originally BV never possessed anything and he was only meant to set up the Happiest Day for the other children before moving on himself. My main reason for this would be Fnaf World showing us that BV is meant to not only recollect his lost memories after the bite but also use them to give cake to the missing children so that they could move on. After doing this I believe he simply rests his soul as he has not only pieced his memory back together but has also saved all of the other children. The only other possible alternative I believe he could be is Shadow Freddy. Also on the whole Bite of 87 thing I get the impression that the 87 in the source code of the teasers was because Scott possibly planned for the Bite of 87 to be in Fnaf 4, but he then realised that what he wanted to show in 4 was completely different from the way the Bite of 87 had been previously described, so he created the Bite of 83 instead. I really wish Scott had elaborated further on the original ending. That way the first four games could receive some closure and their story could be left untouched by the games that came after. Not because Scott as wrong to branch out into a more sci-fi direction, but because it clashed with the overall tone and story of the original games. SL and onwards would be far better off sharing a timeline with the books imo.

I know we'll never get confirmation on this, but it is such a weird decision of scott to make fnaf 4 be on 1983 and not 87, I really wish he would tell us why he made that decision, there's stuff that didn't even exist in 83 during the minigames like the toy animatronics

The thing is We practically know William at this point But CC: We know he died and (more likely) was puppet. We don't know CC!!!! We don't know any motivations and personality Characters are interesting because we don't know anything about them. It'd be really interesting to see how the cards would be dealed if CC was the puppet :D

Also Scott could have easily ended it at FNAF 4 and continued in an alternative timeline to explore more ideas,

You have so many videos. You have been at this for quite a while. I hope your channels blows up and your content gets in front of more eyes. Thanks for the upload.

I would like the fnaf story even more if Evan/C.C was the puppet

3:50 I mean theoretically if GoldenDuo is correct then CC is in FNAF 6/FFPS as Molten Freddy

We definitely know that the crying child dies because we hear him flat like at the end of FNaF 4, while he cries in a dark void, so definitely dead

Golden freddy could've been the kid that was killed outside the restaurant instead of the puppet, and the Puppet who would come later after the bite might've been doing it's best to save him. Perhaps Crying kid feels immense guilt over what his father had done because he had seen the aftermath. The two could've been friends before all the retcons an were actively looking to help each other. Golden Freddy as psychic friend fredbear before it jut became Afton, and the crying child as the Puppet after he got chomped.

Girl... Edit: I wrote this comment without watching the video, because I assumed it was just a "crying child is the puppet theory" but there's obviously more to it.

This actually an interesting theory honestly but is sad that scott decided to change it

I've always felt that William and "Henry" (in quotations because he was unnamed at the time) were brothers I feel like that's why Henry and Charlie didn't have an actual last name, thinking that Emily was Charlie's middle name

3:53 well, minus the mother. except if we consider that theory saying she is Ballora, with her ultimately ending up in Ennard and then Molten Freddy. Also, no need to hate yourself for not having put that piece of evidence in the first video, mistakes happen! Neat vid as always! Oh also, another character that got progressively lost attention as years went by: Phone Guy. I mean, apart from Custom Night, he hasn't been even mentioned in the games since Fnaf World! Even for the books, he may have been mentioned in that lore book, but I think that's about it? Yet again another character that got his importance in the lore decrease drastically with the lore changes and all, but to be fair, he pretty much died during/before Fnaf 1, and he's just a regular guy (who may or may not have a phone for a head), so that would make sense that he didn't have any real importance afterwards

My honest thoughts: When I was first watch your first CC video (which was like a month ago) I thought you already mentioned “SAVE HIM.” Well, I don’t really know what else to mention. Fnaf for sure had a whole bunch of Rectons in the story. Which is honestly pretty understandable in my opinion because, the more lore you put in the more confusing it gets. Thus, you need to rectons some stuff for the sake of making sense of the story. That will be all of my short rambling.

Good to know that, cause I always hear these sounds on the minigames and never understand them, but now it is clear that they were not random Great video!

And Garrett just makes this whole thing come full circle.

Super awesome video. It is very interesting to see how Scott retconned his story to fit the ideas of the novels and tell something interesting, even if it came at the cost of leaving behind interesting ideas.

this video makes me wanna watch old Game Theory videos because you talking about this makes me remember that that WAS my understanding of the lore before getting back in, and I'm curious when the shift happened

Even when all that proof that shows that the puppet is meant to be the crying child originally, I feel like it makes stuff more confusing with the fact that the entire story of fnaf 4 is that the child within the game is that he basically dies, right after he had his head crushed and you hear a faint heart flatline in after the night 6 cutscene, it just doesn't match the kid that died being locked out of a restaurant. Before charlie became a thing it seemed that really the puppet was just random kid just like the other 5

Scott said in a interview that two things got retconned in the original games, this could have been one of then

The take cake cc death could’ve been explained at the time with dream theory. If everything before fnaf 4 was a dream then the take cake death would’ve simply been cc’s interpretation of his own death. Scott did intend for dream theory to be canon after all, but later(after releasing fnaf 4) retconned it >:( because he thought fans wouldn’t be satisfied. But hey, don’t kick yourself too hard for not catching this when you made the first video. That one already proved cc was supposed to be the Puppet, so a little mistake really didn’t lessen the strength of your arguments😊!

I think that, instead of the crying child being literally the Puppet in the original story (first four games), The Puppet is a representation of him, I don't know. Have you ever read the dream theory? The dream theory explains basically everything in the first four games, golden freddy being the representation of the fredbear plush, the shadows being literally shadows of fredbear and springbonnie. Basically everything was a misinterpretation from the crying child, this was backed up by scott hints in his website. And basically Scott retconned the entire dream theory out after fnaf 4. However there is only one missing piece, the Puppet. The dream theory explains how everything in the games is a misinterpretation of the crying child, except the Puppet. The Puppet literally is out of nowhere, it just exists for no reason. From where or why the crying child imagined the Puppet? I don't know, maybe the crying child imagined The Puppet as a unconscious representation of him. Who knows?

Idk, I'm still not convinced, and that's because the FNAF 4 Night 6 minigame ended with a flat-line, meaning that the crying child did die in FNAF 4 confirmed, instead of in the Take Cake To The Children minigame. I remember this being something that was REALLY talked about way back in 2015, about wether the crying child would become the Puppet or he would be Golden Freddy, and a bunch of more things. But it's also true that there were a few changes to the story so it could include characters that first appeared in the books, and with that, a few retcons. Pizza Sim recontextualized the Puppet kid death minigame so it could be Charlie instead of the original mystery male kid. The reality is that FNAF has 2 (Or even 3) completely different stories, one where everything starts with the death of one SINGLE kid at Fredbear's and ends with a fire in Fazbear's fright, and another one where many characters from the original story are given names and where things got way worse.

Hear me out we know that Andrew the croc kid could be are deliberate fill in for the one you should not have killed. Explaining why freadbear is referred as a he in ucn. But Cassidy has to be a missing child in mpi(missing person incident). So we have made the idea that they share golden Freddy. What stopping this from happening again. I’m saying what if Charlie and Crying Child share the puppet. First of all the puppet in the security puppet mini game we know the animatronics can not leave their area in fnaf 3 when they failed to enter the secret room. Besides they clearly can’t just barge out of the restaurant without being freed from the animatronics. So what if Crying Child saw Charlie and when the puppet couldn’t leave he took over cause the Puppet could not leave. Notice the green eyes of the puppet disappear and facial expressions appear. Something has changed in the puppet at this point. The body begins to fall apart when the ai is confused and unaware of its surroundings. But finally what about fnaf 2s mini-game Save him? We’ll notice this child is at the door but the window and when the purple guy appears he doesn’t throw away the body in the alley. Clearly the puppet had no motivation to do anything at this point but something was saying SAVE HIM repeatedly even before the purple guy showed up- I’m saying what if Crying child is the person saying save him save him. And it isn’t until the purple man showed up that the puppet jumpscare occurs when Charlie takes over and does something about it. But it is to late. Finally who is the kid behind the door in fnaf 2. Well if we go back to fnaf 6 with midnight motorists. We see a kid who ran away from his home to that place again”. What if this is Andrew? Clearly he couldn’t just enter the building without a parent or money but. He was outside crying looking at the one place he enjoys being at but can’t be in. Save him. Save him. Save Andrew. That’s all I got tho.

Whoa.... you acknoleged my existence. I did not expect that.... however what I said was true. Here's why: A french RU-vidr by the name of Captain Hype released a series in an attempt to solve the lore in a way nobody has ever done before: when analysing a game, he only take into accounts what was into that specific game and the ones that came before, not the rest: Here's an exemple: when he analysed fnaf 4, he only took into account that game and the ones prior, not what came after. Why doing this you may ask? And why doing it for every single game: the awnser is simple: redcons With Each game released comes a different story, and wich game comes informations that contredicts the already established lore of theses stories: take for exemple this: at the Release of fnaf 2 it was implied that phone guy and the killer are actually the same person. But in fnaf 3 this wasn't the case. He treated the 4 og games and theirs lore like 4 different self contained universes, wich helped explain why certains plot elements exist, what was the point behind them and why they are no longer relevent in the current storyline, like shadows freddy being a representation of the killer (suit used + color of the killer) wich is no longer the case in the lore from after fnaf3 because it was redconed into springbonnie (Wich is probably why Scott didn't brought him back since) Before fnaf 4 released, Scott Had planned the bite to be the one from 87. But due to redcon that he made before the game even launched, he changed everything at the last second even before we got our hands on the game, missleading everyone and thus why we couldn't figure out the dream theory at the time. Captain Hype proved this by brightening the promorional images for fnaf 4 and showing the hidden numbers and theirs evolution from 87 to 83 Moral of the Story, Scott is to blame for this, but can we really blame him at all? After all the Dream Theory was rejected by the community so in a way we kinda asked for the mess we are currently in with the lore....

ive been looking back on the fnaf 2 minigame audio and ive found while yes take cake to the children says "S A V E H I M" the nameless minigame that people have called SAVETHEM happens to have the T

Now it leaves the question, Why did William kill the crying child if the crying child is actually his son?

These videos are why I’m making dang sure that the story I’m working on for this FNAF analog arg feels consistent, but also just a sort of new story (kinda a what if story) Seeing how the Fredbear bite at least to me kinda took away the somewhat importance of bite of 87 with the date being changed and such, I had a idea That “hey, maybe it’s better to revert more toward fnaf 1 lore, with some inspirations from the other games” There’s so much I wanna share what I wanna do in it but it’s better to show when it’s actually done, but just for the sake of it, some of the big things that will be swapped is this: The Afton family doesn’t really exist, neither does fredbears family diner (however there’d be things that’d parallel to the families and locations) Really what I did is make the important key characters be basically families of missing kids, which would explore more lof their personalities we didn’t get to see to much like Charlie and phone guy I plan on Charlie being aged up to a mother of 2, the two kids being of missing children(if you’re curious why this change, I remember back then when the community thought the puppet was perhaps the mother of one of the missing kids kinda like in the living tombstone) She’d be married to a man called Jeremy fritzgerald and have two kids named Jeremy jr/ JJ and Susie I mainly wanted to lay the surface level details on it because really I felt like fnaf should reboot with a more thought on the story like what it did in Vr before fnaf sb kinda did an oopsie

I think this is the reason why animatronics refer to Cassidy as “he” in Ultimate Custom Night. Spirits are addressed as the pronouns of the animatronics they possessed. That doesn’t mean that the Puppet is originally meant to be female, that would be huge misconception that early Scott would never make, but I don’t think it’s Crying Child either. The thing is, CC being both the bite victim (which is a near death experience and would kill a little kid for sure but lets say miraculously he survived) and being the Save Him kid doesn’t sit well with me. Why would he want to go the same restaurant that nearly killed him last time or why would his parents let their kid left unsupervised after what happened? And if he was a Afton indeed, why would William kill his own goddamn child?

This would also explain the tear marks on puppet

Well that actually explains a lot about ..... everything

I thought at the end of FNAF 4 you could hear the sound of a flat line

To be fair the Crying Child being the Puppet doesn’t make too much sense since he was nowhere near the Marionette. It makes sense he would possess the animatronic that crushed his skull like a grape. Charlie being the Puppet fits her character so well. Unfortunately we didn’t get time to explore it because Scott doesn’t know how to explore characters. That’s the problem with FNAF, a lot of interesting ideas and potential conflicts. Like there being two souls inside of Golden Freddy, Michael being a zombie, Ennard, Circus Baby, etc all interesting ideas that get dropped or forgotten about.

I can’t remember who said this or what video it was in but someone said that they believe in fnaf four, the girls bedroom was originally intended to be Charlie’s room. Since henry wasn’t a character until the books came along and elizabeth wasn’t a character until sister location. Which if that were the case, that would mean that happiest day would kinda be like the three siblings reuniting for last time (charlie taking whats now elizabeths place as the only sister and also being the puppet, crying child as fredbear and micheal being the one who helped behind the scenes to make it happen). Which is honestly a really nice ending to think about. At the end of the day though scott is a game developer not an author so over the years retconning and over-complications to the story are bound to happen. Scott probably should’ve hired an author or a continuity advisor to help him at fnaf 4 lol because at this point the story for the afton family or the “main cast” should’ve ended a long time ago, and there would’ve been so many places and ways to take the story which would’ve given them all a satisfying ending

Btw, I know that he's referring to the bite of 87 (which @ this point I have no clue if the bite of 87 is cannon or just got switched with 83) but in the very first game, the phone guy says in night one that "Yeah, I-it's amazing that the human body can _live_ without the frontal lobe, ya know?" Which Implies that the person who was bit is alive, now whether they're actually living day to day life idk, but I just thought that this was interesting and haven't gotten to share it with anyone yet.

my theory is that the crying child was always supposed to be the GF spirit, phone guy being Foxybro and Puppet being their sister that was killed previously and also possess the Fredbear plush, think about how the silver eyes was originaly "fnaf the true story" and how both Sammy's murder and Michael brooks murder are very important in the first book but not that much of a big deal later on. i believe the girl's room in CC's house was the puppet's child room, thats why theres a little mangle there the same way theres the hidden giant crying puppet sprite in mangle's minigame. Phoneguy is afraid of the puppet and loves foxy, we can hear his call reversed in the fnaf 4 corridors, Golden Freddy kills him in fnaf 1 bringing closure to this storyline. Puppet is the animatronic in the prize corner in fnaf 2 a place full of plushies, probably where C.C. got the Fredbear plush, thats how the toy was possessed, Puppet was trying to warn her brother of the danger in Fredbear's. The Happiest day is pratically the same as the bite minigame but in reverse, idicating GF is the crying child, basically a story far more straight foward and simple than the one we finally got

I do agree that CC was originally the Puppet To much evidence for it not to be true at one point But I also just don't care about the retcon I wish CC had more importance but Charlie being the puppet isn't the worst thing to me Also the retcon of the years doesn't bother me. I have just grown to be chill with the weird timeline of the FNAF games and it's lore. It is just all fun to me. Anyways, Good video ♡ I only recently found your channel and I've loved it so far!

Well... It's just... sad... Charlie from books always could've been just a representation of crying child, gender doesn't matter that much Even so, I would love to see the crying child as puppet, those tears would be just incredible Also the way they are, akhem, PURPLE Even small detail with shirt with stripes!!! When I make some story that gets complicated overtime, and I forget what I wanted to make intentionally, or have better idea, I just think how to make what I have, what I want to have If they wanted Charlie so bad, they could've make her posses puppet WITH crying child, just like now cc is possessing it with Cassady! Cassady would loose nothing since she is the vengeful one, they could give her space, like she's not even possessing animatronic but SUIT If they wanted to have split animatronic so bad there are other ways, really Imagine, the one that cares, with the one that never could've felt love from family It would be less dramatic of course, but they still could've Charlie, CC still would've been puppet Thinking over story is not that hard, especially when you have the whole power to manipulate it

man i cant wait to watch this

If that was true then that means that the crying child didn't die due to getting his skull crunched by freadears mouth

I don't get what you are trying to say. I understand that if you look at the details and appearances, the crying child being the Puppet makes perfect sense, but if you look at the story it doesn't make sense. You think the crying child had his bitten off, survived and then was killed again by William? Also, talking about your other video in this topic, I think saying the golden suit in the parts and service room has a dead child inside it is a stretch.

What I would GIVE for crying child to have a bigger role in the story he’s literally my favorite character

As soon as the books and movies started blending and the Aftons were confirmed canon I checked out. Now that we know for sure Scott changed what was in 4's box I'm forever frustrated at this community.

“S A V E H I M” 👀👂 That’s freaking crazy.

Yeah honestly i mean just look at the design. Now its just confusing to see them next to each other and not have them be the same "person" i wish scott would have changed atleast one of their design so they dont look like each other

1:55 I think you need to reay the night 6 of FNaF 4 (it shows a cutscene at the end where Evan fades away as you can faintly hear a heart monitor flatlining )

Happiest day also makes more sense, considering cryboy was bitten and presumed dead on his birthday

6:12 you mean because that would have meant that a certain character woulda been around longer than disposed of relatively early :P ?

I think it's likely that the puppet originally WAS the crying child, but just got retconned into charlie

I think the original intent or at least the ideal idea was that was Sammy or at least a gimmick of him. The novels share some minor similarities to the games that crossed between both continuity’s Sammy was believed to die by Afton or been kidnapped, but it was revealed it was actually Charlie. I think what Scott was trying to get at here was that was supposed to be a sorta gimmick that it was Sammy, and then he made it clear in both The Fourth Closet and Freddy Fazbear Pizzarea Sim that it was actually Charlotte. Especially since Bite victim pretty much dies in Fredbears during 1983, I mean, I could see it being possible if it wasn’t for FNAF4

What if there were two souls in the puppet but one migrated from the puppet to golden Freddy? Just something to think about

Fnaf 4 had significant evidence for dream theory so im going with that as the original headcanon for the games, hate what sister location did to the franchise and made it lean into sci fi

What characters have been thrown off for the Afton's? Cause the only one I can think of is Vanny who could've been a really good villain if they just threw out the whole mind control thing and got rid of Afton.

I don’t think the whole Bite of 87 being in F.N.A.F.4 would’ve made sense. In F.N.A.F.1, Phoney said the reason why the animatronics used to walk around during the day until the Bite of 87, which caused Faz Ent Inc to remove the feature of animatronics walking. The Chomp we see in the mini-game of F.N.A.F.4 was caused by the four bullies. It wasn’t the companies and animatronics fault for the Chomp of 83, again, it was the bullies. They shoved Evan’s head into the FredBear animatronics mouth. So that goes against what Phoney said in F.N.A.F.1. Also, the number 87 is the year that the event took place. So if the F.N.A.F.4 chomp was the Bite of 87, then the mini-games happened in the same year as F.N.A.F.2, which I don’t think it does since the cartoon, FredBear & Friends, is from 1983, meaning that’s a four year gap between when the cartoon was made, and F.N.A.F.2. Also in F.N.A.F.2, Phoney says on night 5 (or night 6?, don’t remember) that FredBear’s Family Diner was shut down for quite awhile, and it was called the original restaurant. Or perhaps Phoney was referring to Horrid Henry Danger Stickman as the original restaurant’s owner? I think he meant the original restaurant, and its owner. He says it’s been closed down for quite a while, now he could refer to it being closed down for years or just months, but I do think he meant it was closed down for years. Plus Evan dies, while Phoney says the victim of the Bite of 87 survived and had to live without the frontal lobe. Now he could be lying but why would he? The Chomp of 83 had to been witnessed by people in the restaurant since it takes place in the dining hall, and there had to been news on it since it’s an event that happened, and there had to be updates on Evan after the chomp. Now that’s a bit of a speculation but I think it’s logical. The point I’m saying is that Phoney and Faz Ent Inc can’t lie about the Chomp of 83, because of the things I said. This is why I think it’s impossible for the Chomp of 83 to be the Bite of 87.

pretty sure he’s shadow freddy but just a theory,a game theory.

What if both of them posses the puppet as William Afton said he I will rebuild you and that the puppet was possessed after the bite of 83 and when cc saw his father kill Charlie he tried to stop it but it was too late so he joined with Charlie in the puppet

FNAF story has gotten so dense that it just needs a hard reboot to smooth over the edges, then we have to stick with this story as more things come out. That's just my opinion

Honestly, it really sucks that the first two games are the highlights of the series, and while I love Springtrap, things definitely started degrading in FNAF 3. The story of the games kept changing, and it really started to seem like Scott was running out of ideas and getting WAY too influenced by fans and especially MatPat. The books never interested me, they always seemed like they were veering way too far off the deep end and were honestly one of the biggest mistakes in the series in my eyes, just before making the books canon to the games. Remnant drove me up a damn wall and the illusion discs go beyond suspension of disbelief. Like many others, I love Scott, but I think his choices of the series' direction were ultimately quite poor. The books and later games certainly have moments that are amazing in a vacuum, Funtime/Molten Freddy's VA & Pizza Sim's ending dialog being standouts.

Hey, the mic sounds different from the last video and sounds like the modern videos today.

until today all information i had was from the games only and I think i'm all the better for it its near impossible to find videos about game lore with out the book lore and coming in as an outsider the far too often cited book lore makes it so much more confusing and far more convoluted but this is how I saw the two crying children as different people from the get go Bite Victim a child who is crying because they're being tormented they got chomped Murder Victim a different child who is crying because they're alone and shutout They got murdered I never ever thought they were the same because this child who hated being at the pizzaria and was being tormented by people who wear animatronic masks got chomped survived that same child wants so desperately back into the pizzaria they hate that they're crying about being locked out then they're murdered I guess this could make sense if they forgot they hated it because of head trauma? To me it seems like the only real retcon here is the gender of the murder victim likely to make clear that murder victim and bite victim are different people

Another great video!.. I really think there is/was a different thing that felt logical to me, but is also outside accepted community guidelines.. so I’ll refrain haha. If I ever make a video this channel will be one of my inspirations. Thanks

Ah yes the lore of The Crying Child WAS the Puppet (SAVE HIM) momentum 100

S A V E H I M Makes me wonder... How far Retconned. My explanation to how to explain that was going to be that the child that dies there is the 5th or the Goldy if you went this path but I don't know if that works now either. It just seems highly likely that it's a retcon. ~ Ok, the 2 Purple men I don't think that's trying to make Mike like anything or like introducing Willi or whatever that's just likely a symbolic thing that turns Mike Purple like how his Father was associated with Purple because IIRC Purple guy isn't actually Purple we don't have someone who's literally purple walking around and people are just like fine with it it's more-so their sprite is Purple and sometimes Orange.

Bite victim is Golden freddy

I think fnaf4 and sister location are together one of the best examplesbof the etherial nature of fiction.

It’s one thing to retcon your story and throw out previous details. It’s another thing to do that, and then proceed to give ZERO INDICATION that you actually did so, meaning we have contradictory evidence floating around.

So I'm a little confused, you bring up the 2 purple guys like that is a retcon that they were to different people, but its not? Like in sister location Michael said "Father. It's me, Michael." and said that the animatronics mistake Michael for William. I do think Michaels identity has been retconed but he was never William.

so who is Henrys daughter that Henry taled about when he was burniong them all together

I’m not sure who’s right because YOU said that only the first 4 games are the only canon ones but MATPAT said the first 4 games aren’t canon