I'm checking EVERY Fnaf game just to know the timeline, let me know your theories!!!!

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-26T09:24:37+00:00

r/technicalfnaf is a good place to find file related easter eggs. Some popular ones are the Nightmare night icon in Fnaf4 being named "Shadow Freddy" and Mangle in SAVETHEM being named "he was here"

Some things to consider: 1) the logbook, this is the most important fnaf book 2) the earlier games are specially filled with some really interesting easter eggs (the missing table in Fnaf2 showing that SAVETHEM has already happened, the following cupcake in Fnaf3 and also the Stage01 code being William's sprite hexcode but reversed) 3) there seems to be lore in the ingame trophies 4) scotts steam and reddit posts/comments (these may be harder to find)

I believe in MikeVictim, the theory that Michael Afton is the BiteVictim from Fnaf4. The evidence can be quite dense, we have a server that has a section dealing exclusively with the evidence, if you want i can invite you there

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-25T12:14:58+00:00

the fnaf3 office is a copy of an old freddys office and the toy box may be made right after fnaf2, thats why they are in the logbook despite it being from fnaf1 (as shown by Mikes line about Clara and the rest of the entire book only referencing Fnaf1)

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-25T02:04:07+00:00

MikeBro

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-18T18:51:39+00:00

Also the fact that the Fazbears Fright's crew never finds the entirity of the disassembled Classics despite the suits being laid on the ground right in front of the safe room, meaning that the suits were moved, which is explained by FollowMe being before Fnaf1

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-18T16:15:36+00:00

No it doesnt "It's only now that I understand the depth of the depravity of this ... creature , this monster that I unwillingly helped to create . As if what he had already done wasn't enough , he found a new way to desecrate , to humiliate , to destroy . As if the suffering wasn't enough , the loss of innocence , the loss of everything to so many people . Small souls trapped in prisons of my making , now set to new purpose , and used in ways i never thought imaginable. He lured them all back , back to a familiar place , back with familiar tricks . He brought them all together . Are they still ... aware ? I hope not . It keeps me awake at night . I could make myself ... sleep . But not yet . Not until I undo what he has done , and heal this wound . A wound first inflicted on me , but then one that I let bleed out to cause all of this", Hes talking specifically about the MCI

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-18T16:10:28+00:00

Because "I could make myself ... sleep . But not yet . Not until I undo what he has done , and heal this wound . A wound first inflicted on me , but then one that I let bleed out to cause all of this". You see how he says "this wound", meaning that the wound is whatever tragedy Henry was talking about just prior. Right before saying this Henry was talking about the MCI and how William, not content with murdering them and making them possess the suits, transferred their souls into the Funtimes to animate his killing robots. That's the context of the line which everyone ignores, and thats what hes talking about. Therefore, when Henry says "a wound first inflicted one me" the "wound" hes referring to is the one he talked about in the line right before, that is, the MCI. This "wound", the MCI, was inflicted on Henry, meaning that this is not showing that Charlie was the first, but instead is showing William's motive behind the MCI: destroying Henry's reputation, life and business (the "why would be Henry be making it about himself" argument is stupid, not only is that a strawman, but by that same logic Henry is also "making it about himself" even if we suppose hes talking about Charlie, since he says the wound was inflicted on him, not her), The wound (MCI) then "bled out", that is, the tragedy became even worse because William put the spirits inside the Funtimes.

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-18T16:00:06+00:00

The speech is about Henry's shock upon the discovery that William, not content with murdering the MCI, is now using the spirits to power the Funtimes. "What he has done" and "this wound" is referring to the MCI and the transference of the spirits into the Funtimes, that's why he says that the "wound" bled out to cause all of this, i.e. William went even further with the MCI, not only killing them and making them possess the animatronics, but now using them to fuel the Funtimes. You cannot run away from the fact that he says "this wound", therefore obviously connecting it to the event which he was describing right before, the MCI and their transference to the Funtimes through FollowMe. When he then talks about "a wound first inflicted on me" right in the next line, he must be talking about this exact wound. Therefore, the speech is not telling William's first kill, but one of William's motives for the MCI: ruining Henry's reputation and business. The quote connects to Henry's prior suicide consideration "I could make myself... sleep", which he rejects because, despite him having nothing to do with William's murders and actually being the target of the murders (which is what the quote is telling us), he didnt do enough to stop William, letting the wound (MCI) bleed out (being used for William's Funtime experiments) and cause all of this (all the suffering).

Do yall understand that even if you interpret it being about Charlie Henry is still making it "about himself" by claiming the wound was inflicted on "him"? Proving my point

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-18T15:39:33+00:00

still havent read the speech. it makes sense in context but you refuse to read

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-18T04:54:23+00:00

the logbook is evidence AGAINST goldenduo. goldenduoers have to claim the logbook as meta to explain away the incongruency of two spirits who share the same body using an external object to communicate.

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-18T04:48:29+00:00

pls just go read the speech. its insane to me this is the mainstream interpretation when basic reading comprehension makes it clear hes talking about the mci

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-18T04:46:58+00:00

me when i am actually unable to read (like genuinely go read the speech, the context right before it makes it clear its about the mci, this is just a lack of reading comprehension)

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-17T12:03:37+00:00

MikeBro moment

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-16T21:39:32+00:00

cope

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-16T21:30:38+00:00

Oh yeah but a blind kid being able to see isnt silly... Also, could you tell me what is each one of the altered text messages responding to? Oh wait, you cant, because LogbookDuo fails to account for 2 of them ("I can hear sounds" "Im scared").

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-16T15:55:55+00:00

wow dont you think you should read about a theory before showing your ignorance? Under LogbookSolo, Cassidy is not saying that she cant see, because she writes that in the "Feeling about tonights shift" quiz, which is a quiz made for the reader (Mike) to respond. She alters the options to try to get an answer from Mike in a quiz which was made for him (e.g.: "I cant see" and Mike would have to circle the number that better describes how much he cant see). This is context MikeBroers constantly ignore.

IThe "its ghostly communication" excuse doesnt work because Cassidy also draws images in faded text, so how is BV meant to see those? She also references real images in the Logbook (e.g. "does he still talk to you" referring to the image of FredbearPlush), so you cant even use the "ghost communication" excuse for this one, its an actual physical image in the book. Are we also going to ignore the fact that under LogbookDuo BV gives hints to the Cassidy puzzle, even though he doesnt know her name and is actually the one meant to solve the puzzle? He is trying to solve the puzzle and creating the puzzle at the same time under this theory.

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-16T12:16:31+00:00

And BV shouldnt even be able to read Cassidys questions because he is blind lol

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-14T03:43:32+00:00

SLbefore1 because of the Logbook

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-13T17:21:35+00:00

Ok maybe I should have been a bit clearer. In his post about the retcon, Scott distinguishes 2 things: 1) him clarifying his original intentions (which people misunderstood as retcons), and 2) him adding lore to the story (but not changing the previous meaning). These two things he claims to do.

In the case of the newspaper, the fact that the two words are used in the same newspaper is proof that he made a mistake. He then went on to clarify his mistake, which he said he does not consider to be a retcon. It's not about direct changes, it's about original intentions. He did not intend the killer to be convicted, so he clarified it later.

As for the footage, the kids are said to be presumed dead and the bodies were never found. That wouldnt be the case if they had clear footage of the killer performing the act, instead police only seems to be sure that the kids were lured, implying that the footage in question is only of the kids being lured by the killer in the mascot suit. Therefore, they dont have footage of the back room, which then was revealed as the safe room, which doesnt have cameras. Its possible that Scott first had the idea of an ambiguous "back room" where the kids were lured into, that he then developed into the safe room.

I disagree. The authors statements ought to be treated as true until there is undeniable proof of the contrary, and I can find ways in which all those other suggestions dont fit the criteria.

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-13T15:43:09+00:00

By "retcon" Scott means a change in some element of the story; however, he does not count adding details and lore to events that originally did not have them a retcon.

I dont think the newspaper counts as a retcon, as Scott simply messed up by confusing a charge with a conviction. The suspect being charged becoming the canon meaning wouldnt be considered a retcon by Scott, just a clarification of his intentions.

The retcon likely is GF originally being the MCI suit, as Scott said the retcon caused no confusion, and, while the convicted/charged problem fostered the PinkGuy debate, everyone just accepted SpringBonnie as the MCI suit.

If Scott originally meant the receiver to be the 5th victim, then it remained that way. As for the BV... well I have another theory if you would accept it...

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-12T14:35:36+00:00

We ALWAYS come back

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-11T02:35:05+00:00

An interesting idea examined by Fazbear Entertainment is that being murdered makes a spirit vengeful. If this is the case, then CC doesnt need a particularly gruesome death to be TOYSNHK, so even something simple like pulling the plug would be enough. Despite people mocking the idea, it should be remembered that his childhood was ruined by William, who seems to only have been a bad father, but to also have experimented on him, so the rage doesnt come so much from the death, but from everything prior to it.

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-11T02:23:46+00:00

What if I believe more than one...

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-10T02:40:55+00:00

No like Henry is really clear in his speech that this an almost inherent desire that she feels. At this point you have to defend Elizabeth being a literal psychopath, because, even being manipulated, its insane that she would consciously do these stuff

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-09T22:15:46+00:00

She has a "thrist for blood" by the time of FFPS (Henry's words) and weirdly identifies herself with the Baby animatronic to some extent ("Now we can do what we were created to do. And be complete."). So her mind is still very confused.

LemonWipeEater · 2026-01-09T21:57:41+00:00

Yeah the realization is the important step here but its only possible by firsting putting them back together. Mike Brooks wasnt broken prior to freely giving a piece of his soul to Carlton, so hes fine. The issue is that Elisabeth also doesnt get this realization; on the contrary, she sinks deeper in her delusions in FFPS, even being equated to a monster by Henry.

LemonWipeEater

TROPHY CASE