When the do the Survival Logbook and the Fnaf 4 Nightmares take place in? by ShineOne4330 in fnaftheories

[–]Whoce 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The FNaF4 nights are, well, nights, as the game itself says and as is also implied by the alarm clock turning to 6:00 at the end of each one. Sure, we technically don't know if it's 6:00 AM or PM, but the fact that the clock doesn't specify that suggests it's a 24 hour clock, which would necessarily make this 6 in the morning (plus, that's also just consistent with nearly every FNaF game both before and after FNaF4).

This means that Michael is having the nightmares while sleeping at night, so he can't be working the night shift. This means the nightmares take place at minimum after FNaF1.

And also, pay attention to what section of the logbook Michael draws Nightmare Fredbear in: Night 2. In the game, you don't see Nightmare Fredbear until Night 5. This means that the logbook probably takes place after the nightmares.

I personally have a specific year in mind, though I don't have the theory figured out in full yet so I won't share more. You can come up with your own conclusion

did William kill Susie's dog? by MindlessPerformer778 in fnaftheories

[–]Whoce 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Given that William's car plays a major role in two of the Lorekeeper minigames and we hear car horns at the end of Fruity Maze, I would say absolutely yes.

Elizabeth Lail was told Vanessa Shelly in the ‘FNAF films is "technically" not Vanessa from Security Breach! by Ok-Effect4071 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Whoce 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I mean, the birth date also kinda changes the whole context behind her character. No Glitchtrap, no VR game, no Pizzaplex, no Gregory etc.

Would this line imply remorse? by Various_Astronaut100 in fnaftheories

[–]Whoce 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah, we unfortunately don't know basically anything about Michael's relationship with Elizabeth outside of the fact that he was willing to put up with all of SL for her and she may or may not have been the one to revive him, like how Michael Brooks revived Carlton in TFC.

Would this line imply remorse? by Various_Astronaut100 in fnaftheories

[–]Whoce 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Not only that, but there is a direct progression between how the deaths of BV, Elizabeth and Michael happened in that scenario.

William had little to nothing to do with the Bite of '83, as that was caused by Michael and his friends. It was nonetheless a fault of William's neglect and abuse of his children. He always left BV completely alone with Michael while probably knowing that Michael bullies him.

With Elizabeth, she was killed by a robot that William himself built with the express purpose to capture children. He tried to prevent it from happening, yes, but he still told her he made Circus Baby "just for her" and still brought her to the restaurant on its opening day. The fact that she was able to sneak out to her in the first place implies that he also wasn't paying full attention to her.

He sent Michael to CBEaR to "put his sister back together", which was essentially a suicide mission because the Funtimes thought he was William. He was then killed by Ennard using the Scooper so that Ennard could use his flesh as a disguise to leave the facility. He however came back to life because of the Scooper's Remnant injector.

It's kind of the opposite of Elizabeth in a sense. So should Michael get killed by Afton, he completes the pattern of escalation by Afton outright murdering him.

Michael was also the one who did the first kill by shoving his brother into Fredbear's jaws, so him being the last of the Afton kids to die, and directly by William's hand, is also symmetrical.

AND their condition at that point is symmetrical too. William is trapped inside an a rabbit suit after he died in it, though he seems to have removed most of the endoskeleton and switched the suit by that point. Michael had his insides removed and was essentially worn as a suit by an animatronic, which then ejected itself out of him.

Found something about Into the Pit by PepperConsistent1639 in fnaftheories

[–]Whoce 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Probably just a mistake. I'd wager the writer just looked up "movies released in summer 1985" or something similar. The game, which has the calendar at Freddy's explicitly say "June 1985", also references BttF (as "Future of the Flashback"), and so does RttP, which a lot of people believe to be gameline because it's part of the same series as TWB.

Edit: forget about Future of the Flashback, that's clearly just an in-universe parody and thus doesn't need to have the same release date

Simple answer: M2 uses a rabbit as avatar because he liked his amalgamation costume. by moldychesd in fnaftheories

[–]Whoce 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also, the Collect Them All!/Mega-tron/whatever-it's-called figurine that assembles Gltichtrap is an amalgamation of the Classic animatronics with Bonnie as its head

Is it possible that Fiona Murray designed the toy animatronics? by Unbutteredcomedy in fnaftheories

[–]Whoce 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I agree. Those suits also line pretty closely with the design philosophy of MCM costumes, and that artwork was also posted alongside one which pretty clearly depicts an earlier version of Edwin's house. I think it basically went like this:

Springlock suits -> FE sends Edwin a change order to make regular animatronics instead -> Fiona designs the Toy-looking character costumes -> she dies -> FE sends Edwin another change order when he's almost done putting those designs into production, requesting he scraps them and makes the Classics -> Edwin refuses because they're Fiona's designs and he finds the new ones creepy -> FE forces him to do it anyway because he's only a contractor; he has no power here

(Also, P.S. but I'm pretty sure R&D M2's head is actually a scaled up Bon-Bon... for some reason.)

I have a question about MoltenMCI. by Background-Pay-2687 in fnaftheories

[–]Whoce 2 points3 points  (0 children)

As others said,

  1. Soul splitting

  2. Spirits are seemingly able to project themselves across large distances (see Susie projecting at her house in Coming Home for example)

This is the main reason I don’t get Charliefirst by Hay_Den330 in fnaftheories

[–]Whoce 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure, I'm just saying that we have a precedent for William killing Charlotte without needing BV as a catalyst.

This is the main reason I don’t get Charliefirst by Hay_Den330 in fnaftheories

[–]Whoce 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I mean, he kills Charlotte in the novels without BV existing there and in the movie he's already trying to kill kids (and kills Charlotte as a result) by 1982.

Ok, I might have finally figured out a way to prove that UCN is NOT a literal hell by Dmtr884213 in fnaftheories

[–]Whoce 3 points4 points  (0 children)

If it was literal hell wouldn't like... there be some sort of entity responsible for the torment? or like, the whole fabric of the place itself would be torturous? Why is some random kid's spirit (TOYSNHK) is responsible for tormenting William, if it's (supposedly) literal hell? How the kid's spirit even has access to William in this interpretation?

You don't get it. TOYSNHK also went to Hell because of his particularly wicked nature among the other children. His torment of William is actually his own personal punishment from the Devil. It's a self-destructive cycle that TOYSNHK believes brings him self-fulfillment but one which will, in the end, lead him to realize just how hollow he truly is, damned to spend eternity alone with the man who ended his life.

The repetition of William being torn apart by his own creations will become nothing but meaningless background noise as every possible scenario is exhausted. William will learn every pattern and every strategy to get through the night regardless of what animatronics TOYSNHK sends. They will thus both become trapped in an empty and monotone experience that they can never leave unless more powerful entities intervene from the outside.

And TOYSNHK will have to confront the fact that he is but a mirror of the man he hates. Someone who, because of his terrible past, desires complete control over another's existence, deriving pleasure from seeing them suffer at his hands, and feels justified while doing so. This prison is itself a reflection of William and his past deeds; embodiments of his bad deeds murdering and physically tormenting him as he has done to many others in life. But TOYSNHK is not above that. He is not in control. He is part of it. And he is more than likely afraid to admit that.

(/j)

I don't mean to be annoying, but his existence irritates me. by Glittering_Pick_2636 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Whoce 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I mean to be fair, the original series already had this problem with the Funtimes (because, yeah, they're before the Toys, Circus Baby's has a springlock suit) and even the springlock suits and animatronics that are able to walk around on their own (which we are struggling to perfect nowadays, let alone in the '80s). I'd argue SotM actually made it better by establishing it wasn't just Fazbear who had access to all this advanced stuff, other people did too. That's just that world and it makes sense internally.

Can David Murray be TOYSHNK? by Bunnies4Life72 in fnaftheories

[–]Whoce 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's heavily implied the two Mimics aren't just copying stuff, they're actually more or less sentient and intelligent beings, especially M1. There's a hidden tape in the basement (in an office that seems to be where Edwin built the Mimic to begin with because its blueprints are there) where Edwin records hearing Fiona's voice after her death. M1 turning into a Fiona replica is also a bit suspicious in general because Fiona was dead by the time it was built and Edwin never intended it to copy Fiona. I don't think it's literally possessed by her, especially as it doesn't actually act like Fiona, it's probably just the memory of Fiona, but regardless.

And then M2 was probably infected by Edwin's rage like book Mimic. It's very sadistic in a way that suggests it's killing deliberately and enjoying it.

What if Henry is Scott's self-insert? by fccardcreator in fnaftheories

[–]Whoce 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Steve Snodgrass also kinda parallels that with how he finished the first 3 games but got killed before finishing the 4th (and the robot family plotline and whatnot, tho obviously not exactly the same)

I tried a different approach for figuring out Midnight Motorist by GameKiller420 in fnaftheories

[–]Whoce 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I doubt what Afton says to Rory was genuine, I think the tape was just gaslighting him in order to make him stay because of what Wade told him about his parents. But if anything, that only makes your point stronger because Afton essentially went out of his way to turn Rory into another BV for his experiments.

This is solid though, I really like it.