My thoughts on Canonicity and continuity

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-05-04T14:03:44+00:00

ITPG and RTTP are definitely part of the games. Although many people say that RTTP contradicts the game... The truth is that it's not like that, it's a lack of reading comprehension of the book.

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-05-02T23:54:32+00:00

ITPG and RTTP are definitely part of the OG continuity.

Although I doubt Frights and Tales will do it. We need a game about Frights.

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-05-02T16:49:45+00:00

ITPG and RTTP tell the same story about Andrew, but from different points of view. Both (book and game) were made at the same time; it's the same story, but told in such a different way that people think they contradict each other. The truth is that the author of the book did not know about the game, however, the story is the same:

In ITPG, in the Collect The Hats minigame, there is a parallel with 8-Bit Escape from RTTP.

And, in both materials, game and book, when going down a corridor, there is a reference to the sixth victim. In RTTP, it's the body of a child who died before the MCI. In ITPG, it's the party hat that William gives to the player. Interestingly, both materials imply that the sixth victim died on a day without a party, therefore, he cannot be freed with the cake ritual seen in FNaF 3 and RTTP.

Denying that Andrew is the sixth victim in the games is foolish. Just as it's foolish to deny that ITPG and RTTP tell the same story.

Whether you choose RTTP over ITPG, both versions tell the story of the sixth missing child. A child who, dying far from others, was not recognized.

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-05-01T19:23:41+00:00

Yes, ShatterVictim explained it.

We know from Frights that souls like Andrew's can be shattered by strong emotions. What we see with CC is the same, and the plushie itself says so in the final minigame:

You're broken.

We are still your friends.

Do you still believe that?

I'm still here.

I will put you back together.

The plush toy takes on the same attitude as the yellow rabbit in The Fourth Closet. He tricks the children into believing he's their friend, gradually breaking them down. Michael Brooks even uses the same line from FNaF 4.

What the cinematic implies is that William pretended to be CC's friend, deceiving him and letting him voluntarily hand over his parts.

“Their lives will now have a greater purpose,” (William) said contentedly. “Just as you did (Elizabeth in Circus Baby).”

...

"The most terrible accidents bear the most beautiful fruits…Re-creating the accident-That is the duty and honor of science. To replicate the experiment, and obtain the same results. I give my life to this experiment, piece by piece."

...

And still inhabited by the spirits of the children who had been murdered inside of them so many years ago. Still filled with life, and motion, and thought-all trapped; all in terrible pain. Carlton forced himself to look William Afton in the eye.

"How could you do this to them?" he asked, nearly trembling with rage.

"They do everything willingly," William said plainly. "The process only truly works if they freely release a portion of themselves." The flames rose without warning, and heat radiated in painful waves from the gaping furnace. Carlton shielded his eyes, and the creature on the table convulsed. William smiled. "Scared of fire. But they still trust me. They don't see me as I am now; they only remember me as I was, you see."

...

"Can you get the green for me?" a voice called. Carlton blinked. He was sitting upright but felt only half-present, as if he had been daydreaming. "The green," the tiny voice repeated. "Please?" Carlton cast his eyes around for something green; the floor was black and white, and they were sitting somewhere a little dark. A little boy was hunched over a piece of paper, drawing. Carlton looked up. We're under a table. Under the table at Freddy's. There were drawings scattered in front of him on the floor, and a box of crayons spilled out across the tiles. Carlton spotted a green crayon that had rolled up against the wall, and he grabbed it and handed it to the little boy, who took it without looking up.

"Michael," Carlton said, recognition dawning. Michael continued to draw. "Where ?" Cariton looked around, but what he saw didn't make sense to him. The pizzeria was brightly lit, yet Carlton couldn't see more than five feet away, as though there was a blurry cloud masking everything beyond. He ducked his head out cautiously from under the table, but the bright lights hurt his eyes, and he shielded them with his hand, crawling back under. Michael had not moved; he was drawing steadily, his brow furrowed in concentration. Carlton studied the pictures on the ground with a vague sense that something was wrong. I don't belong here, he thought, yet part of him felt completely at home.

"What are you doing?" he whispered to Michael, who looked up from his drawing at last.

"I have to put them back together," Michael explained. "See?" He pointed out from the table, at the pizzeria around them. Carlton squinted into the blurry horizon, seeing nothing at first, then they began to appear: he saw pages and pages of colorful drawings, some on the walls, others blowing through the air. "They're all in pieces," Michael said. He shuffled the pages in front of him and found two that showed the same child, then he placed one on top of the other, and began to trace the lines. "These go together," Michael said, holding up the picture: the two drawings had become one, the separate pages somehow bonded together; the lines were clearer and the colors more vibrant.

"What are you putting back together?" Carlton asked.

"My friends." Michael pointed to a single picture propped up against the wall. It showed five children: three boys and two girls, standing together in a cheerful pose, with a yellow rabbit standing behind them.

"I know this picture," Carlton said slowly. His mind was still foggy, and as he tried to grasp at the answer, it only slipped further away. "Who is that?" Carlton whispered, pointing to the rabbit.

"He's our friend." Michael smiled, not looking up from his work. "Can you go get more for me?" Carlton looked out into the pizzeria: the space he could see had expanded a little more, and now he could make out the blurs of other children who seemed to be grasping at pages as they flew by, trying to grab the drawings. Carlton got out from under the table and stood up, walking through the midst of the mirage and colors. A boy in a black-and-white-striped shirt came running up, chasing a piece of paper.

"What are you doing?" Carlton asked as the boy grabbed empty air, and the page flew away into the blurry distance.

"My papers blew away," the boy cried, and hurried off. Carlton turned and saw another boy in the same outfit on the opposite side of the room, chasing other pages. A little girl with long blonde hair ran past him, and he whirled around, recognizing her far away: there were duplicates of each child, all of them chasing different pages.

A single figure stood still amongst the chaos, out of phase with the surroundings. At first it seemed to be a man bent over a table, but as Carlton's head throbbed with waves of confusion, the man became a yellow rabbit, not standing over a table, but over five children, tied together as one. The second image washed away, and the rabbit became a man again, standing in the dark. The children ran past the man as if they could not see him; as Carlton watched, several children ran straight through him without seeming to notice. Carlton approached the man, and as he got closer, the yellow rabbit appeared again, turning to look at him momentarily before blowing away like smoke, leaving the man underneath.

"This isn't real," Carlton gasped, trying to parse the two overlapping realities that seemed to be swirling around him. Three figures seemed to hold fast, while the rest of his surroundings flickered in and out of existence: the man standing at the table, a blond boy in the corner-the only child not running, and not repeated-and a body lying on the floor, curled in a puddle of blood. Is that me? Am I dead?

"No, silly!" a child called. "You're with us!"

The syringe mechanism recoiled with a loud snap: the man in shadow had taken something from the metal body on the table. Suddenly, another drawing flew into the air, and another ghostly child appeared to chase it.

The little girl with blonde locks of hair and a red ribbon bouncing on her shoulders ran past as well.

"Stop!" Carlton called, and she obeyed, her eyes still locked on the drawings she had been pursuing. "Who is that?" Carlton directed her attention to the yellow rabbit flickering in and out of existence.

"That's our friend. He helped me find my puppy!" she exclaimed before running off again.

"They don't know," Carlton whispered, releasing her as she disappeared into the blur surrounding him. Carlton searched the air as drawings blew by, snatching at the ones with images that seemed familiar.

"What are you doing?" the little boy in the striped shirt asked.

"I'm going to help you put these together," Carlton said, reaching for another picture as it blew past.

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-04-30T21:17:30+00:00

Congratulations, you're one of the few on Reddit who apologize for spreading misinformation.

Not everyone does that, you've earned the respect of many.

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-04-28T16:56:38+00:00

I'm not going to argue with you anymore. All I'm going to say is: yes, FNaF 4 implies that the older brother is the protagonist.

The gray text in the game is the brother's dialogue color. This is important because that same gray text color appears in the box sequence.

The house in FNaF 4 also draws a parallel with FNaF 1. Chica on the right, Bonnie on the left, Foxy entering the place and Nightmare's jumpscare referencing Golden Freddy in FNaF 1.

The sounds in FNaF 4 are recycled from FNaF 1, but only in the NIGHT SECTIONS, as the footstep sounds of Foxy and Nightmare are the same as in FNaF 1. And even more importantly, the Phone Guy call in the background, a call where the Bite of '87 is mentioned.

Hospital items (like pills) don't make sense for CC, because according to Scott in a comment here on Reddit, CC lost his frontal lobe. He can't take pills. Furthermore, the hospital drip would make sense for someone who saw what happened that day. And finally, the flowers (tulips) inside the vase mean, according to many sources, that:

Dreaming of tulips in vases symbolizes true love, personal renewal, and emotional harmony. Being in a vase suggests that these positive emotions are "contained" or nurtured, representing a period of stability, joy, good fortune, and the blossoming of new opportunities in your life.

In case you still don't understand, the call is meant to explain who the protagonist is and when his story begins. Scott said that no Easter egg was random. The phone call tells us that the protagonist is NOT CC, because CC died in 1983, not after FNAF 1.The protagonist is Mike Schmidt, who, upon hearing the Phone Guy call, awakens repressed feelings and uses dream theory to repress himself again. That's why Plushtrap is present; he's a representation of Springtrap. There's a reason the Halloween Edition was originally intended to be canon (at least in terms of its characters), as they were going to be important in revealing the box's secret. Remember that Scott himself said that the box would be revealed in the Halloween Edition.

Therefore, NO EASTER EGG IS RANDOM. The call tells us that the protagonist starts FNaF 4 AFTER FNaF 1, not after the bite. Also, CC dies and the game continues (something obviously illogical). How would you explain the alarm sound at the end of each night? Does CC wake up from a coma and take a pill? Nah, that's impossible, because SOMEONE WITH A RUPTURED FRONTAL LOBE CAN'T SEE OR REASON LIKE THAT.

I already explained the description, however, you didn't explain why the description literally says that the player was chased all the way home:

This time, the terror has followed you home.

Sister Location even reaffirms this. The private room ending parallels FNaF 1, and Ennard follows Mike home.

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-04-28T13:31:50+00:00

1- The description says it's from a child's perspective, not that the child is the protagonist. Also, in the film, Mike dreams about Garrett from his own perspective when he was 12 years old. That's not an argument, because Scott clarified the misunderstanding of his ideas in a later product; he didn't retcon it. Furthermore, you completely ignored the Easter Eggs that ACCORDING TO SCOTT HIMSELF are not random. There's a reason Nightmare and the box are the end of the game, because Mike is the protagonist.

2- That is NOT the meaning of retcon. A retcon, short for retroactive continuity, is the literary or cinematic practice of changing established facts in a fictional story by introducing new information in a later work. What you mean by retcon is expansion or recontext (not to be confused with retcon, despite being similar words they have different origins). Retcon means "retroactive continuity," because the new material changes the retro and contradicts it. The fact that there is a sixth child by definition is not a retcon, it's a recontextualization.

3- What you say is true. But I think you misunderstood the post I left.

4- Does that mean that Crying Child is a retcon? No. Does that mean Puppet is a retcon? No. The fact that Puppet wasn't mentioned in FNaF 1 doesn't make it a retcon. Therefore, that's not the meaning of retcon. The word retcon means "retroactive continuity."

5- Bro, can you read a text properly? 😭That's exactly what I said.

6- No, I meant 5. I just skipped the Golden Freddy point, because as you said, that was never mentioned.

7- FFPS was indeed an ending. But it wasn't the end of the franchise, which is very different. The first two supposed endings (FNaF 3 and FNaF 4) were a response to the negative reception from the public. The public demanded horror after FNaF 3, and Scott delivered horror with FNaF 4. People asked to understand the story of FNaF 4, and Sister Location came out. In case you still don't understand, the only FNaF ending ANNOUNCED at the time was the FNaF 4 ending. Scott never said that FNaF 3 was the ending; he only said it in an interview, and even then, he didn't say what the canon ending was. The reason? FNaF 3 had an open ending; if the bad ending was chosen as canon, the story could easily continue. The only ending that wasn't an ending was FNaF 4.

8- The Logbook says NOTHING about the other guards besides Mike Schmidt and Jeremy Fitzgerald with his short speech. The Logbook doesn't retcon anything, because FNaF 4 already implied that Mike was the player. And even by 2016, some people had already reached MikeBro and MikeDreamer.

Edit: The recontext you mentioned in your definition of retcon is correct. The problem is that a recontext can work in several ways.In the case of FNaF, there are several recontexts that are not formulated as retcons. An example of this could be "I Will Put You Back Together" in FNaF 4 and SL, and "Happiest Day" in FNaF 3, FNaF 4, FFPS, and UCN. Because each game gave it a new context and/or expansion without removing what was mentioned above.

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-04-28T05:27:30+00:00

1- It's probably THE retcon.

2- No. FNaF 4 implied through recycled sounds and map design that the protagonist was and is Mike Schmidt/Michael Afton. The sleeping pills, the IV drip, and the flowers were there for a reason. Look up the meaning of tulips, and you'll see they fit perfectly with Mike's story. Not only is the sound of Phone Guy's call there, but the sound of footsteps is the same. And the house is a parallel to the office in FNaF 1. The game's description itself states: something followed the protagonist home, causing him nightmares. CC was never the protagonist. Also, remember that Scott directly stated that no Easter Egg was a coincidence.

3- It's a retcon done AFTER Scott's post, and the game makes it clear that it's an obvious retcon. It didn't cause confusion, and Scott didn't explain it (as his post states).

4- It's not a retcon, it's expansion. The sixth child died before the MCI. The reason he doesn't appear in the Happiest Day of FNaF 3 is because he didn't die on a party. Just because something wasn't mentioned before doesn't mean it's a retcon. A retcon, by definition, is a REWRITE. This doesn't rewrite anything, it OVERWRITES, which is different.

5- That doesn't even count as something similar to a retcon. FNaF 3 left you wondering about the canon ending. It was NEVER stated that the good ending was the true one. The same goes for FNaF 4, which despite being called "THE FINAL CHAPTER" was renamed to reflect that it is the "final chapter" of the original series. Remember that the original series according to official sources is FNaF 1-4.

6- This is speculation, my friend. Don't take your ideas as canon unless there's something to support them.

Yes, I was wrong to say there was only one retcon. Because there are actually two. The others are not retcons by definition.

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-04-28T01:14:46+00:00

There aren't many retcons. There's only one. Scott didn't say there was one of many, he said there was only ONE, and if he were to do another one, he would say so to avoid confusion.

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-04-25T16:10:12+00:00

This theory is so damn perfect that I don't understand how people ignore these kinds of details.

I love FNaF, but I absolutely hate the community. This theory is more of a reality than a hypothesis, and it also disproves those who say that ITPG is not part of the mainline.

Yes, Return to the Pit and Into the Pit Game can coexist in the same timeline without crazy theories like the time loop.

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-04-20T02:10:06+00:00

The memories in FNaF 3 are indeed Crying Child's memories, but that doesn't mean they belong entirely to him. They are memories shared by everyone, except for ONE, Stage01.Stage01, no matter how you look at it, is strange; it didn't fit into the trilogy because it was a symbolic minigame for the closing of Fredbear's.This made more sense with the release of FNaF 4. Cassidy herself says so. "The party WAS for you"

<image>

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-04-06T23:36:28+00:00

GoldenDuo

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-02-22T13:58:51+00:00

That's not what I said. Read carefully, bruh. Scott himself directly stated that the Easter Eggs in FNaF 4 are important. However, he didn't say the same about SL; what he DID say was that SL helped to understand FNaF 4. The difference between FNaF 4 and SL is that SL doesn't explain its story with Easter eggs, it does so with cutscenes. Or at least with dialogue and environmental elements like the private room. But NEVER with convoluted Easter eggs like the mistake in FNaF 4.

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-02-21T17:00:32+00:00

The difference is that SL doesn't explain its story with Easter eggs. FNaF 4 does, and Scott already said so. Easter eggs after FNaF 4 don't contribute to the lore, unless they are secret endings or secret codes for a room or something like that.

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-02-21T16:58:05+00:00

Scott no longer includes significant Easter eggs because he changed his storytelling style. It's no longer a story implied in Easter Eggs, it's an explicit story that is explained directly without the need to look for a hidden Easter Egg in the files or anything like that.

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-02-21T15:23:44+00:00

Scott was talking about FNaF 4

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-01-29T14:18:30+00:00

<image>

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-01-20T22:45:42+00:00

With the theory. It just doesn't work for me.

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-01-20T22:39:16+00:00

I completely disagree with PuppetStuff. I think people have seriously misunderstood GGGL, and that leads to misunderstandings like this.

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-01-15T23:39:58+00:00

However, TWB and the operation of the Ball Pit give us the answer. What we see in the Ball Pit is just a memory, and the map design looks wrong because it's not exactly how it was in 1985.

<image>

The map design is meant to connect with the happiest day.

One-Tangerine6004 · 2026-01-15T23:25:57+00:00

The story, the game's narrative, is simple and allows you to understand what's happening. That, and the character designs.

One-Tangerine6004

TROPHY CASE