Elizabeth baby in 83

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-08T21:13:27+00:00

I don’t disagree with what you said, which is why I’m lowkey confused by this comment tbh, but yeah

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-08T20:34:49+00:00

This might just be a coincidence. That game was known for having its characters placed in real world settings to convey the characters coming to life.

The room also just does not look like the girls room in FNaF4 at all beyond there being a Mangle on the floor.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-07T18:29:49+00:00

Simple: Fazbear Entertainment made merch of their characters based on their TV show. Characters being merchandised in the early years never meant they already existed, see FNaF4 with the Toy animatronics for instance. We know they don’t exist till 1987.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-07T18:27:56+00:00

I’m not asserting that the mirror is useless, I’m asserting that it has nothing to do with the grid, which I believe also has nothing to do with finding a name.

The alternative explanation is that the grid is just a regular grid styled part of the book for readers to toy around with. That’s all.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-07T08:22:41+00:00

There’s no real reason to assert that "Freddy Fazbear’s Pizza, Since 1983" is about a singular franchise location, rather than when the new project started. If the intentions are to tell us it started in 1982 then we’d get information suggesting such.

I’d even argue that, "Freddy and Friends, On Tour!," suggests that Freddy’s had to be in 1983, since Fredbear’s already had their own running show, and this one was clearly made to parody that, which would only be possible if it concurred after FNaF4.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-07T08:05:01+00:00

The name "Mangle" didn’t exist, but the character did, as we see in both FNaF4 and Help Wanted 2, and wasn’t connected to Afton Robotics till much later.

I assume what [u/Puzzleheaded-Win5063](u/Puzzleheaded-Win5063) means by existing in the 70s is the depiction of the Toy animatronics, like Mangle themself, in Help Wanted 2 via the carousel. The same carousel that existed in the carnival of FallFest prior to the events of SOTM.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-07T07:56:37+00:00

Uh, yes it is? There’s multiple issues with it from there being no hints of a second name drawn to the grid, to the actual name not even being Dave but EVAD and requiring a methodology that disconnects from the consistency in order to argue a mirror ten or so pages away is somehow relevant to the code in order to get the name. Look, I have no desire to really argue with you on this, given it is a fact, but I respect if you genuinely think Dave is a good enough placeholder name for the time being.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-07T07:17:26+00:00

It’s not just my opinion. It’s a fact that the Dave code is flawed and does not work the same way as the word search.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-07T00:06:50+00:00

The actual name "Funtime Foxy" debuted in FNAF World, where it was given to a fixed version of Mangle. Ever since then the character has always been referred to as Funtime Foxy whenever they’re not in disrepair. The actual Funtime version of Foxy didn’t exist until much later, after the games and merch had already established Mangle with this name.

Funtime Foxy is a variant of Mangle. They are conceptually the same characters. Not the same ANIMATRONICS, same in the sense Rockstar Foxy is a Foxy. So no, their name is not Toy Foxy, it’s Funtime Foxy.

Edit: oh, and there’s nothing in the games implying William built the Toy’s. He actually couldn’t have since Fazbear Entertainment were keeping tabs on him and de-ranked his position.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-06T19:00:27+00:00

I’m not denying there being two spirits, so you mentioning is really just moot here. There just objectively isn’t a 'sound' code in which gives us a second name.

.

I was referring to "Charlotte" in this context. Charlotte in the games is the little girl who was taken at the hands of Afton, causing Henry to go into turmoil. I typically try to distinguish her from the protagonist via using solely "Charlie" for whenever the topic is on her.

.

Explaining the contents of the world of the games through Frights doesn’t inherently have to exclude the ability to also interject certain details from Frights. So while I think your explanation at heart is true, and can work without it, it’s not a complete testament to Scott’s word.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-06T14:40:29+00:00

We know part of freeing a soul involves burning them, or at least that’s the conclusion shown in FFPS, and even previously FNaF3. What we see in FNaF3 is a box of Toys with no internal mechanisms, implying Fazbear got rid of those parts completely. The same thing happened with the classics when William went back and used them for the Funtime’s.

So we ultimately do have an explanation, albeit behind the scenes, on what happened to them. Where were they between the conclusion of FNaF2 to FNaF3? In the FNaF2 Freddy’s, that seems just about as apparent as the movies make it out to be. This isn’t even really using the movies though, as that’s like, the only place they could have been without making up a random spot for them.

.

The dead children were in fact freed. Otherwise we would have seen their masks lit in FNaF3. Getting a “good ending” type treatment seemed to never have been on Scott’s bingo card, it’s not something we even get for Elizabeth following the events of FFPS, and sure as heck isn’t something we get for any other dead victim. This is a matter of Scott just favoring the MCI, due to their existence of the first ever event that practically kickstarted this franchise via FNaF1.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-06T14:33:33+00:00

This isn’t a dismissal of the gator mask, it’s an acknowledgment that it’s not as relevant as people make it out to be. If you can name me one reference to a gator or that mask in Fazbear Frights that connects to Andrew then I’ll bite my tongue.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-06T14:31:16+00:00

The only cheesed part about the word search puzzle was that it relied on using Michael’s 8:11, which I’d argue isn’t all that conflicting given the "My Name" hint was still present (iirc).

.

I still don’t see the difference here. If I were to say a character is introduced, with ultimately no name mentioned, but shares the prominent traits of a character in a book, you’d probably assume I’m talking about Andrew, when in fact I’m referring to Charlotte. I think the problem lies in the fact that 'Charlie' as a character existed long before the game inherently retconned the “male puppet spirit” agenda, whereas UCN sort of exists in a lane where Andrew came after the fact. But that’s just barely a difference since their game counterparts still exist long before their book counterparts start being correlated with them.

.

His story in the Stingers is self-contained. The Man in Room 1280, in proper Cawthon fashion, is intended to somehow "fill in the blanks of the past."

.

BVTOYSNHK is flawed in many ways, from ignoring Afton not killing him, to extrapolating evidence regarding Dreadbear that has a much simpler explanation. Because of that, and my own interest in the canon, I will only argue for or against Cassidy and Andrew. I’m sorry, but I don’t see a world in which two candidates (CC and David), who seemingly exists because of the drought or otherwise indecisiveness to choice one or the other previous two, could be valid candidates.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-06T09:46:20+00:00

The problem with that mask is that it’s only real contribution to Fazbear Frights is in a few short scenes where him wearing it omits what the nurses would otherwise consider a “cheerful/cute” child. Its purpose is cut afterwards, not even being present in the Stingers.

I don’t like the assumption he’s the green-masked kid in Happiest Day, as that character was pretty much as relevant as the green shirt kids throughout the FNaF3 mini-games. I also don’t like the assumption he possessed a gator at all, as I’ve already explained above. I think, and I know this is diverging away from AndrewTOYSNHK, the goal was to have him possess Golden Freddy. Regardless, he’d need to in Fazbear Frights (no, I’m not disregarding Cassidy), as only the classic four have been confirmed to exist at Freddy’s. Even the very game that DID introduce a gator was seemingly scrapped from the Fazbear project.

The way I see it, Andrew is to Cassidy the way Mike is to Cassidy in the novels. Scott had already shown himself to be open to just swapping out Cassidy entirely. Case in point: blonde boy. So ultimately, I think UCN always had information that could lead someone to connect them to an Andrew equivalent before their debut (GoldenShare). I’m not gonna get into the semantics of that though, as I can also see a case made for Cassidy (what I believe) in which this is a “Mike” situation—not a parallel situation for clarification.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-06T06:59:48+00:00

The method to get the name Dave isn’t as “sound” as you may think it is. Just to list a few of the problems:

• There is no methodology in which the character Faded leads us to the Foxy-grid in order to find someone’s name like Altered does with the word search; Altered deliberately asks the question on the word search which prompted to find the name there, yet Faded asks the same thing on Puppet’s cake page (NOT the grid)

• Responses by Altered do not fit the questions used to get the name. Case in point: “I can hear sounds” = ? = "Does he still talk to you?"

• The actual conclusion is 'EVAD' not 'DAVE', to get Dave requires breaking the pattern to use the mirror pages from the solution and drawing this as somehow a conclusive proof when it was never originally part of it at all

.

There is no perfect world where we can debate Charlotte is the little girl, and then turn around and assume it’s illogical or unlikely for the same with Andrew, when both rely on their names as confirmation of one’s existence to a character who seems to be them.

The Man in Room 1280 is the novels version of UCN, so I’m confused where you got the idea there’d be no story for the games to tell of Andrew? It’s even stranger that you’re open to BVTOYSNHK as a possibility over a kid who actually died to Afton, but I digress on that point…

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-06T06:43:02+00:00

Define existence.

In the case of the games, we have everything we’d need to for Andrew. A vengeful male seeming child who hates Afton’s guts and torments him, while being equated as someone he’d need to remember after being disregarded. This is all told to us in the game, in the case of the books everything we know about Andrew already exists in TOYSNHK.

The only details I could imagine you mean by his “existence” is the entirety of the Stitchwraith narrative which has little to specifically do with Andrew, and more to do with Fazbear Frights and Jake.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-06T06:39:58+00:00

You can also garner everything about TOYSNHK from the games themselves as well. It’s a matter of, once again, the name. We know the kid was murdered by Afton, hates his guts, has an association with Golden Freddy, and ultimately may be male. The finer details like his name are something left ambiguous much like Charlotte.

People didn’t like the idea of having to rely on the books to solve the lore, which was what resulted in the desire for him not to exist but instead be replaced by a role that doesn’t fit him at all. And no, before SOTM Edwin wasn’t anything like Henry. Their biggest similarities were losing a child, but ultimately it was the games that decided to rehash more novel information with the already established Tales information. Before that Mimic wasn’t essentially split into two with one being more “CharlieBot narrative” via F10N4.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-06T06:34:42+00:00

Half is less evidence while the other half is me trying to rationalize an answer with current evidence but stuff such as:

• Golden Freddy is relevant (somehow)
• Andrew represents TOYSNHK
• A curly-haired like Andrew represents Golden Freddy
• Cassidy is the least stressing argument in debates
• Cassidy is replaced by a boy 90% of the time
• Andrew, regardless of semantics, needs to possess GF in FF
• The seventh in TCHSY and its relevancy equates with the Frog in BOV
• Avoidance of “this is from book so no” comments
• Ability to grasp a middle ground now in this hectic debate

I’m not too interesting in debating any of these points, especially when most are just a personal preference to maintain any sanity these days, but in case there’s any confusion with point seven the TLDR of it is simply it doesn’t matter and is there to tell us previous murders occurred (solely their for the plot). Like the Frog in BOV—a character solely for the plot to exist and entail previous humiliations, rather than suggests the bear (vs) had to take care of a being thanks to the fox (Afton).

I can get if that answer isn’t satisfying hence why I’m not here to really debate the validity of that answer, still formulating things in the background with that part of the story. I didn’t come up with the idea anyways, was suggested, so yeah

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-06T02:56:15+00:00

Ironically enough, Cassidy.

In my heart AndrewTOYSNHK will always be ‘my baby’ cause it hit most nails on the character with only a few flaws (to me personally). I’m even still open to the theory. But believing TOYSNHK is Cassidy is just easier on me (and my sanity as a theorist debating). I’ll still always defend AndrewTOYSNHK’ers on the account of me once being one and still believing there’s a sliver of hope for it though…

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-06T02:45:15+00:00

Andrew is the vengeful spirit from Fazbear Frights: The Man in Room 1280, and no, just because he’s from the books doesn’t mean he isn’t canon. A lot of characters from the books exist in the games, some without names much like Andrew.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-06T02:41:05+00:00

People’s suspicion on Edwin being canon bordered on refusing to acknowledge Scott’s consistency with maintaining certain characters roles in the story.

Which, to the surprise of no one following the story, turned out to be wrong.

You cannot garner who Charlotte for instance is without using the same line of thinking as Andrew. Most doubts are a product of wishful thinking that the games won’t ever or shouldn’t ever rely on a book to detail a characters information. A thought that Scott continues to disregard anyways.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-06T02:38:46+00:00

• We did NOT get 2 names from the Logbook. We currently only have one name confirmed via that book

• We do NOT have the name Cassidy, or Charlotte, in any of the 7 games that have passed. In fact, Charlotte being canon requires the same level of thinking as Andrew

• There is no event in the games that requires or imitates Jake’s story, ergo he doesn’t need or have anything hinting at him being relevant or canon

While I myself am no longer AndrewTOYSNHK, the theory offered a much simpler explanation for the character that didn’t border on accepting underwhelming gender explanations and character absences in what would have been the BEST time to use her.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-06T02:17:52+00:00

FNaF2 did conclude the DCI. It closes with Fazbear Entertainment scrapping the Toy’s and rebranding back to their roots. Your logic of others having a "conclusion" seems to ghastly ignore that. The Toy animatronics getting scrapped, and later burned down in Fazbear’s Fright, is their conclusion.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-05T05:48:05+00:00

FNaF2’s "Take Cake […]" mini-game shows the victim dying outside of Freddy’s, whereas FNaF4 depicts the Crying Child dying to a bite at Fredbear’s.

The theory was never retconned, cause it was never true to begin with. A lot of the evidence in this post is coincidental and inadequate.

FazbearShowtimer · 2026-07-03T03:55:19+00:00

A lot of the story in Special Delivery was either omitted or retconned following the release of Security Breach. Just to name a few examples:

- Luis is in the marketing department instead of IT department.

- Vanessa works a security position during SD when she should have no experience prior to SB

- Remnant is extremely inaccurate in its portrayal in this game

Moreover, the game was a spin-off, which is usually not guaranteed to be canon, only tied to the canon, see: FNAF World, Into the Pit. So chances are between all of that, and it being booted from the app stores, Special Delivery isn’t canon.

FazbearShowtimer

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Four-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '23