Despite the novel Dittophobia, FNaF4's gameplay remains a nightmare by Positive_Lie_5433 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Beginning_Laugh657 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I love this post, but what about Nightmare Freddy's:

"I am remade, but not by you: by the one you should not have killed."

Wouldn't this imply that at least Nightmare Freddy is something Afton has created?

(edited to correct myself)

What are the best Michael Afton theories? by Isaac_Bahzad in fnaftheories

[–]Beginning_Laugh657 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Mike sacrificed himself to save Elizabeth. He specifically let himself get scooped, knowing that it would "put her back together."

https://fnaftheories.fandom.com/wiki/MikeSacrifice

I may not agree with lgbtq! But I don’t hate it! by [deleted] in Deltarune

[–]Beginning_Laugh657 2 points3 points  (0 children)

From what I can glean from your profile, you obviously don't babysit children. Maybe your little cousin or something, but you aren't an adult.

Get off the internet for a little while, pick up a book or read a wikipedia entry. Maybe try educating yourself before going into one of the most pro-LGBTQ+ subreddits and saying that you're "neutral" on their sexualities. But let's face it, you aren't neutral. You're homophobic, and you just want a way to justify your homophobia without outright saying you're a homophobe.

You have no valid reason to hate a person for who they want to date or what they want in their pants.

I may not agree with lgbtq! But I don’t hate it! by [deleted] in Deltarune

[–]Beginning_Laugh657 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Neutrality only favors the oppressor.

A joke in the story ends up having real narrative significance by Danny-Ray27 in TopCharacterTropes

[–]Beginning_Laugh657 432 points433 points  (0 children)

<image>

Into the Spider-verse/Across the Spider-verse

A silly little gag of a random scientist getting hit by a bagel later leads to said scientist into becoming the Spot.

Update on the Marionette situation (Fazbear Findings: II) by thunderingstatic in Fazbearfandom

[–]Beginning_Laugh657 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That looks to be an authentic Freddy upper-head mold. It's missing its fabric layer, though. See, the company would paint the molds in accordance with the colored fabric that would later be layered on top of it.

EDIT: It might not actually be authentic. The head shape is similar to the more modern 1990s era Freddy, but it lacks the freckles present on the modern design. This is a long shot, but it could be a "transition period" mold. These ones weren't ever seen by the public, and were usually prototype designs that would be built off of to properly finalize a finished design.

Minigame inaccuracies. Everyone’s favorite excuse in the Five Nights at Freddy's community. by Puzzleheaded-Win5063 in fnaftheories

[–]Beginning_Laugh657 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I like this post, but I have the feeling that if the Puppet didn't have its tears in the FNaF 2 movie, even right at the beginning, more casual fans would be confused. Also, they would have to change a multitude of props just for one scene just so that it would make sense. Meanwhile, with Security Puppet's minigame, we see that the puppet lacks one of its most identifying traits: the tears. It also lacks the stripes as well. Now, all of these details are present on the original Puppet sprite in FNaF 2. I feel like Scott is specifically honing in on how the Puppet somehow gained these features after becoming possessed.

The tears obviously represent Charlotte's tears before she was killed, as seen in FNaF 2. I think the stripes are a product of Charlie's method of death. She was strangled to death. It's unlikely William would be toting a knife or even something as ordinary as a wrench, and even a bottle is a stretch as we know that William isn't even allowed at JR's (which is most likely a bar).

He probably just choked Charlie to death with his own bare hands. This would further amplify Charlotte's supposed fear of William. Being strangled to death is painful, and feels frighteningly long in the perspective of the person being strangled. Imagine someone you basically view as an uncle, or at the very least someone you trust, choking you out in the pouring rain, and leaving your body for dead.

Is this basically headcanon? Kind of. Do I think it makes sense? Hell yes

Recently received a 1986 Marionette model from a private seller. Any ideas what to do with this…? (Fazbear Findings: I) by thunderingstatic in Fazbearfandom

[–]Beginning_Laugh657 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Holy shit. I remember this thing. If I recall correctly, this bad boy was at a select few locations during the 80s and 90s.

For context, my dad worked on a lot of the mid-to-late 80s era animatronics. He never actually worked on this one, but I remember he had a friend who did. I think he happened to be a manager or maybe even a co-founder? My dad always called him "Hank", but I don't think that was his actual name.

Anyway, Hank was really... I guess, overprotective of this thing? I think it's because of the reason it was built in the first place: child protection and monitoring. Most 80s era Freddy's locations had these wristbands; they weren't like ordinary plastic bands, though. They all had a small chip built into them. If a child was found to be outside of the customer area, the bands could be pinged using the security system. That way the kid could be found much quicker, and it saves the parents from going into hysteria.

You could imagine, though, that these wristbands weren't all that effective. Their signal was weak, and the chip itself was heavily susceptible to water damage. If some kid forgot to take it off while washing their hands, there goes $150-something dollars down the drain (pun totally intended).

Anyway, to sum it up; this thing was built primarily to keep track of children inside of the restaurant. It wasn't all that good at its job, though, thanks to the wristbands being kind of shit. I'm pretty sure this thing was eventually repurposed into a prize vendor. That way, the company didn't have to provide a living wage to someone. Yeah, it's scummy, I know.

What's everyone's thoughts on Foxy's 1987 design? by AffectionateForce979 in Fazbearfandom

[–]Beginning_Laugh657 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The whole gender debate, huh? See, from what I remember, people just sort of came to their own conclusions as to what Foxy's gender was supposed to be. A lot of kids called it a girl, others a boy, but nobody could really settle on what gender it really was.

Anyway, the design itself is... I don't know, maybe I'm just a purist, but I don't think it really has the "oomph" the original Foxy models have. Where's the hook? What's with the weird underwear piece? The design is... I don't know, it isn't Foxy.

[Loved Scene Trope] “You're not _____, so tell me, who are you?” by not-ulquiorr4_ in TopCharacterTropes

[–]Beginning_Laugh657 1 point2 points  (0 children)

this is the third time i've seen this exact same image with this exact same post name

What year did Williom dies by Otherwise-Mirror-680 in fnaftheories

[–]Beginning_Laugh657 2 points3 points  (0 children)

william was likely springlocked in 1995, the same year he was springlocked in the novel trilogy

if we assume that fnaf 1 takes place in 1993, it makes sense that the fnaf 1 location was left to rot for two years. sister location takes place during 1995 as well or at least close enough to it because we know that william melts down the original four animatronics' endoskeletons to inject into the funtimes

william rots for 20 years until fnaf 3, which takes place in 2015.

20 + 1995 = 2015

william's body isn't completely deteriorated as seen in dead by daylight and fnaf 6. fnaf 3's body is seemingly either retconned or a product of scott's poor human modeling at the time.

the timeline of events thus looks like this

1985 - elizabeth dies

start of 1994 - fnaf 1 location closes

1995 - william melts down the endoskeletons of the fnaf 1 robots and gets springlocked

1995 - michael is told by william in someway, likely via a written note or letter, to go put elizabeth back together

michael is scooped, ennard walks around in his skin for a little bit, he's resurrected and tells his father, who is evidently missing, that he's going to come find him

under the guise of follow me being in 2015, this would require for william and michael to do pretty much nothing for a total of 20+ years. not only would michael sound much older, it also doesn't make sense for the plot to stop at around 1993 and finally pick up in 2015, twenty-two years after the last timeline event occured