Use them as a way of coherently clarifying the direction of the series by not using the MC from the games specifically, but from the perspective of someone in universe that knows them, and the situations going on/ suffering the consequences. A way of saying "look at these shadow dudes, this is where they come from. Oh the killer is back in town right before we open/close Freddy's? Lets go check it out."
Given how bright the movies aesthetic is going for, I don't think there will be a time in the movie excluding the Afton scenes where it would be dark enough to pull it off naturally.
"could" isn't an argument. Scott has yet to actually comment on a theory that was 100% wrong. And given most of those synopses and descriptions refer to Scott in the third person.
My gripes would be William's motivation, a lot of people have been trying to retcon it with no real evidence to support it, and the fact this would imply Freddy's closes before Fredbear's, given the fact if it got the place shut down in most interpretations, it would here as well. This would also imply Soul-Splitting, which is still one of the most annoying ways of trying to answer questions. If there's no remnant, there's no reason these plushies should be possessed. You could make an argument about Cassidy moving place to place, but Cassidy has never been proven to be GF from Fnaf 2, meaning they are most likely possessing the fnaf 1 location.
Tbh, I think it's more narratively satisfying, assuming the Bite of 83' occurred first, then William likely hadn't built his lab under his house yet, and even with wanting to keep the CC away from the springlocks, why would he waste 4 endoskeletons, not to mention it's heavly implied William only made the funtimes, no other animatronics
My only gripe about him being shadow freddy is because of a theory Iâve been toting around about how everyone on the thank you image are real to some extent and thats why the shadows and phantom arenât on it, yet all of the nightmares are. Though I could be wrong given more an more details I hear everyday, I feel like theres a lot of info everyone has to try and fit back together with each new piece of evidence
GF is a springlock suit, anyone stuffed inside would likely be left off the hook as just another incident. And I agree with that both of them are inside.
Trauma from his brother or because he's a walking corpse since this game has to take place after FNAF 1, thanks to the phone guy messages playing in the background
I would like to counter that for a second on my own timeline, I considered the idea that the reason William hates springlocks and tried to keep his kids away was because HE was springlocked. It felt like such a random addition to the book, and came from out of nowhere, but wouldn't Evan be more afraid if he watched the robots try to "eat" his father over some stranger. Just a thought...
After Fredbears closed, his suit was modified, hence why he appears like that in FNaF 1. This is not the same suit as the FNaF 2 GF, who was made for the 85' Freddy's, they had A LOT of spare costumes made, and the tapes imply performers were at most Freddy locations, hence the safe rooms. No Fredbear reboots.
This ignores the fact there has to be a reason Mike was fired for odar, and the speech happens after his spitting out. This would be trying to imply Micheal was helping his father, which would make no sense, William clearly hated him.
- Is the suit "Glitchtrap" wears canon? Given the location, it would imply he killed the main MCI kids at the FNAF 1 location with it, which would be messy due to the springbonnie suit being seen on fruity maze to lure Susie, and it would make more sense for William to have used the Withered GF suit to lure the 85' kids, hence Shadow Freddy going to the safe room.
Th-this has been a fanon theory for a while now? Hell, MatPat even made this argument, so I'm not sure who your trying to get to argue that point with.
Currently the debate is over weather the toys are possessed at all, or if the 1985 had parts used to build the toys, so the toys now are possessed by them? Hence something borrowed something new? My current understanding is given the easter egg in fnaf 1 was never retconned from being canon, likely susie and the gang are actually the save thems, hence 1987 causing GF to jumpscare you in Fnaf 1, but a lot of kinks to work out.
Golden Freddy in FNAF 1 and FNAF 2 are implied to be spirits despite using REAL suits. They are stuck in spring lock mode implying even if they were real, no movement.
Would you feel more comfortable using characters that killed some strangers or your own children? Less characters and obviously plot armor. They are still fictional characters after all
Canât work, only 4 endos, Candy said 5. You canât caveat golden Freddy being there not only because theyâre a springlock suit and never appear in the Follow me minigames. Not to mention that shadow Freddy uses the withered model every time and to retcon this one outing as the fnaf 1 animatronics wouldnât make sense and pulling shit out of thin air. People have come to think theory is fact, when in reality most people just ignore the evidence to follow their intuition. Just like the people that claim phone guy made things up because Matpat said it. Not to mention the use of springlocks suits and for case of motive it makes more sense for Micheal to be scooped before these games
I see where your thinking is, but if we consider this it would break current understandings of the timeline. William and Micheal are both EXTREMELY likely to visit the FNAF 2 location, which would not be possible if William is still alive to be the day guard and Micheal have the same "odor" message like in FNAF 1. This implies William can't be springlocked until after these events. I agree William went there with that intention most likely, but it's also implied their destruction was all the same night, so he wouldn't have time to melt them down yet.
Except none of the forms in these minigames make any sense, even within the context of Fnaf 3 specifically, but also it wouldnât really make any sense for the withered animatronics to be on stage before they were fixed, but also Bonnie has his face? Chica has her arms? Both of these again point to the idea that these arenât the withered animatronics in any sense, it just make much more sense for them to be the Fnaf 1 animatronics considering thereâs much more evidence point too that.
Itâs kinda as simple as saying they were fixed. It says in the news paper they were saved for reorganization which everyone assumes is the creation of the FNAF 1 animatronics, because itâs the normalized ideology, but whos to say they didnât attempt to use the withers one last time? Of course the latter wouldnât make sense, since saying this took place before would prevent William from being there for events we know he was a part of.
Thereâs too many logical leaps in my eyes to assume that these are fixed up withered, I mean itâs much easier to say âScott added buttons just because, and Fnaf designs are rarely consistent so it doesnât really matterâ vs saying âClearly this one detail means that our entire understanding about the timeline is incorrect, and William is actually dead during the events of Fnaf 1 because these buttons clearly overrule every other design detail that point too these robots being the designs from the original Fnaf.
I donât think William being dead before or after FNAF 1 doesnât really mean much, he just has to be there for FNAF 2, its just kinda of a pain to shrug it off as âCawthon Forgotâ
Scott said the series could be completely put together back in FNAF 4, and even after saying he changed whats in the box, he chose not to say the timeline was unsolvable. He didn't retcon anything, he's just built on top of what was before.
A slight update, I forgot for a second that the Neurolink existed, and by most extensions it is capable of making strides into telekinetic abilities, and if someone were to take the time to develop it, it could be completely possible to use technology to manipulate the world around us. This is the only current way I can think of it working scientifically
Even further, if someone were born in the future, assuming we'll reach it, they could theoretically grow up in a world via AR and Neurolink technology to create an identical world to those in fantasy. After all, if the world has been altered around you to hide the strings then you'll never know your in a play until someone from the outside tells you the truth, sort of a Truman show esc effect
I wish I understood the reference, but consciousness is one of the few phenomenon science has yet to explain, so it would make sense for them to be connected in some form
Use them as a way of coherently clarifying the direction of the series by not using the MC from the games specifically, but from the perspective of someone in universe that knows them, and the situations going on/ suffering the consequences. A way of saying "look at these shadow dudes, this is where they come from. Oh the killer is back in town right before we open/close Freddy's? Lets go check it out."
Given how bright the movies aesthetic is going for, I don't think there will be a time in the movie excluding the Afton scenes where it would be dark enough to pull it off naturally.
"could" isn't an argument. Scott has yet to actually comment on a theory that was 100% wrong. And given most of those synopses and descriptions refer to Scott in the third person.
My gripes would be William's motivation, a lot of people have been trying to retcon it with no real evidence to support it, and the fact this would imply Freddy's closes before Fredbear's, given the fact if it got the place shut down in most interpretations, it would here as well. This would also imply Soul-Splitting, which is still one of the most annoying ways of trying to answer questions. If there's no remnant, there's no reason these plushies should be possessed. You could make an argument about Cassidy moving place to place, but Cassidy has never been proven to be GF from Fnaf 2, meaning they are most likely possessing the fnaf 1 location.
That doesn't change my question.
Tbh, I think it's more narratively satisfying, assuming the Bite of 83' occurred first, then William likely hadn't built his lab under his house yet, and even with wanting to keep the CC away from the springlocks, why would he waste 4 endoskeletons, not to mention it's heavly implied William only made the funtimes, no other animatronics
Yeah, it's probably because the others are toys of animatronics, while it is a Plushtrap's toy, not Springbonnie's toy.
My only gripe about him being shadow freddy is because of a theory Iâve been toting around about how everyone on the thank you image are real to some extent and thats why the shadows and phantom arenât on it, yet all of the nightmares are. Though I could be wrong given more an more details I hear everyday, I feel like theres a lot of info everyone has to try and fit back together with each new piece of evidence
GF is a springlock suit, anyone stuffed inside would likely be left off the hook as just another incident. And I agree with that both of them are inside.
Trauma from his brother or because he's a walking corpse since this game has to take place after FNAF 1, thanks to the phone guy messages playing in the background
I would like to counter that for a second on my own timeline, I considered the idea that the reason William hates springlocks and tried to keep his kids away was because HE was springlocked. It felt like such a random addition to the book, and came from out of nowhere, but wouldn't Evan be more afraid if he watched the robots try to "eat" his father over some stranger. Just a thought...
Yes, it gives motive for the "It's Me" everywhere, and explains why GF could pass on after Happiest Day, but Cassidy still be there to torture William
After Fredbears closed, his suit was modified, hence why he appears like that in FNaF 1. This is not the same suit as the FNaF 2 GF, who was made for the 85' Freddy's, they had A LOT of spare costumes made, and the tapes imply performers were at most Freddy locations, hence the safe rooms. No Fredbear reboots.
No different then the other kids throughout the minigames, just there, not lore relevant.
This ignores the fact there has to be a reason Mike was fired for odar, and the speech happens after his spitting out. This would be trying to imply Micheal was helping his father, which would make no sense, William clearly hated him.
- Is the suit "Glitchtrap" wears canon? Given the location, it would imply he killed the main MCI kids at the FNAF 1 location with it, which would be messy due to the springbonnie suit being seen on fruity maze to lure Susie, and it would make more sense for William to have used the Withered GF suit to lure the 85' kids, hence Shadow Freddy going to the safe room.
Th-this has been a fanon theory for a while now? Hell, MatPat even made this argument, so I'm not sure who your trying to get to argue that point with.
Currently the debate is over weather the toys are possessed at all, or if the 1985 had parts used to build the toys, so the toys now are possessed by them? Hence something borrowed something new? My current understanding is given the easter egg in fnaf 1 was never retconned from being canon, likely susie and the gang are actually the save thems, hence 1987 causing GF to jumpscare you in Fnaf 1, but a lot of kinks to work out.
Golden Freddy in FNAF 1 and FNAF 2 are implied to be spirits despite using REAL suits. They are stuck in spring lock mode implying even if they were real, no movement.
Would you feel more comfortable using characters that killed some strangers or your own children? Less characters and obviously plot armor. They are still fictional characters after all
Canât work, only 4 endos, Candy said 5. You canât caveat golden Freddy being there not only because theyâre a springlock suit and never appear in the Follow me minigames. Not to mention that shadow Freddy uses the withered model every time and to retcon this one outing as the fnaf 1 animatronics wouldnât make sense and pulling shit out of thin air. People have come to think theory is fact, when in reality most people just ignore the evidence to follow their intuition. Just like the people that claim phone guy made things up because Matpat said it. Not to mention the use of springlocks suits and for case of motive it makes more sense for Micheal to be scooped before these games
Assuming there were 2 MCIâs it makes the most sense in explaining why only the children in Molten Freddy show ip and not the other 5
I see where your thinking is, but if we consider this it would break current understandings of the timeline. William and Micheal are both EXTREMELY likely to visit the FNAF 2 location, which would not be possible if William is still alive to be the day guard and Micheal have the same "odor" message like in FNAF 1. This implies William can't be springlocked until after these events. I agree William went there with that intention most likely, but it's also implied their destruction was all the same night, so he wouldn't have time to melt them down yet.
Except none of the forms in these minigames make any sense, even within the context of Fnaf 3 specifically, but also it wouldnât really make any sense for the withered animatronics to be on stage before they were fixed, but also Bonnie has his face? Chica has her arms? Both of these again point to the idea that these arenât the withered animatronics in any sense, it just make much more sense for them to be the Fnaf 1 animatronics considering thereâs much more evidence point too that.
Itâs kinda as simple as saying they were fixed. It says in the news paper they were saved for reorganization which everyone assumes is the creation of the FNAF 1 animatronics, because itâs the normalized ideology, but whos to say they didnât attempt to use the withers one last time? Of course the latter wouldnât make sense, since saying this took place before would prevent William from being there for events we know he was a part of.
Thereâs too many logical leaps in my eyes to assume that these are fixed up withered, I mean itâs much easier to say âScott added buttons just because, and Fnaf designs are rarely consistent so it doesnât really matterâ vs saying âClearly this one detail means that our entire understanding about the timeline is incorrect, and William is actually dead during the events of Fnaf 1 because these buttons clearly overrule every other design detail that point too these robots being the designs from the original Fnaf.
I donât think William being dead before or after FNAF 1 doesnât really mean much, he just has to be there for FNAF 2, its just kinda of a pain to shrug it off as âCawthon Forgotâ
I don't think that matters much anymore, Scott wanted fnaf 1 to be his last game so he didn't plan out any of the lore
Scott said the series could be completely put together back in FNAF 4, and even after saying he changed whats in the box, he chose not to say the timeline was unsolvable. He didn't retcon anything, he's just built on top of what was before.
When did Scott say that?
Timeline -
A slight update, I forgot for a second that the Neurolink existed, and by most extensions it is capable of making strides into telekinetic abilities, and if someone were to take the time to develop it, it could be completely possible to use technology to manipulate the world around us. This is the only current way I can think of it working scientifically
Even further, if someone were born in the future, assuming we'll reach it, they could theoretically grow up in a world via AR and Neurolink technology to create an identical world to those in fantasy. After all, if the world has been altered around you to hide the strings then you'll never know your in a play until someone from the outside tells you the truth, sort of a Truman show esc effect
In the immortal words of Tanith Lee: "The soul is magic".
I wish I understood the reference, but consciousness is one of the few phenomenon science has yet to explain, so it would make sense for them to be connected in some form
Otsu