I Solved The Story Of FNAF
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 апр 2023
- Hey everyone!!! In today’s video you get a taste at what is going to become my full FNAF timeline video!!! The video is already in production and should be coming later this year :) Thanks for watching 💙
Videos featured from @GameTheory , @Dawko , @Dragzilla
FOLLOW ME!!!!
FUHNAFF TWITTER: / fuhnaff
PERSONAL TWITTER: / johnandrewyt
INSTAGRAM: / johnandrewyt 
Игры
Its heartwarming to see John giving a shoutout to unknown RUclipsr like MatPat, what a chad
Fr
video released 7 mins ago and we're already gobbling it up
Yo mister white, stop watching FNAF theories and help me cook💠.
TEACH ME YOUR RECIPE HEISENBERG!
Only almost 20 million subscribers
Never have I been so interested in the lore of a game but not want to play it in my life.
Same I literaly bought FNAF 4 to play when it came out and never played another FNAF game until Security Breach came out. FNAF 1-3 made me think It wasn't that bad, then I played FNAF 4.
I have played 0 minutes of FNAF but watched like 300 hours of lore videos 😶🌫️
playing just complicates the lore more tbh 💀💀
Same I don’t like horror games I always think there is an animatronic outside the door because I watch lore videos and watch fan games nothing else
Yeah it's pretty disappointing that youtubers completing 4/20 mode in FNaF 1 set the standard for unlocking the most important story bits in future games. I'd LIKE to see all the endings, but I'm just not doing the hardest difficulties in all the games... I'm just not doing it...
It feels wrong, Michael helping William, but as you've said before, you like to find and explore different perspectives and ideas no matter how unpopular they are. This is why I respect you as a theorist.
i always thought michael helped his father till sister location
@@puroleguy I suppose based on all the music animations I've seen and what not, William is always depicted to be cruel to Michael because Michael was kinda rebellious to him and of course, killed crying child. Actually though, now that I think about some details, I have an interesting theory, it's probably incorrect but just in case. What if Michael is the teen stage of the 4 robots for crying child? And by the time he goes to work in sister location, it would probably be the adult form. This is stretching it quite a bit, but until I can come up with a better explanation here it goes. Crying child dies to Fredbear, twice. The first time is the original, human crying child but he dies to the animatronic that clearly broke in or lured him out from midnight motorist mini game. Then Afton makes the child robot the crying child, and the teen robot Michael. However he program's Michael to torture crying child to prevent another accident, to scare away crying child. But Michael takes it too far and the bite of 83 happens. Afton hates Michael, but knows Circus Baby is possessed by his daughter, so a few years later, he programs Michael to get her, knowing that he'll either "die" trying, or actually get something he needs. Either way, he'd be happier. This is how sister location happens and at the same time he goes to the run down '93 location (FNAF 1) to retrieve the original endos that have souls in them, as he wants more remnant, but that'swhen we see him get springtraped. I had a previous theory where he took the toy animatronic endos to make the funtimes. This is because around the time of FNAF 2 (1987), the toy animatronics are said to be scrapped while the originals are being remodeled for the '93 location, so nobody would suspect anything if the toy animatronics went missing. It's also highly likely that he did two sets of murders, one in the old location with the originals, and most likely the other in the jr's location with the toy animatronics. It makes sense that he would go for the toy animatronics first because those kills were more fresh in his mind and he wouldn't be able to get the originals since they were going to be reused, meaning someone would notice if they disappeared. I think Afton might have been the phone guy because in a fnaf 2 call, he mentions how he doesn't like the puppet, that it thinks too much. This is probably his realization of the souls. In fnaf 1, phone guy seems to die on night 4, but what if this is the night he dismantles the originals, when he gets springlocked? Then night 5 phone call is golden freddy (Cassidy) celebrating her happiest day, the day she ruined Afton's plans. It would also make sense from fnaf 3, where phone dude plays old instruction recordings of phone guy, talking about the springlock suits, something Afton would be quite experienced and knowledgeable about. I'll end my theory here for now, it's a lot to take in, but I feel this is kind of a possibility. Obviously there's a couple holes and bad explanations like crying child dying twice, but otherwise, I feel this could work.
@@breathofthedeity2366 I ain’t reading all that.
@@personismaybe0610 I mean if you have the time you could, but if not that's okay too. Just ideas that are probably farfetched but food for thought
@@breathofthedeity2366 you lost me at Michael being a robot
Having Henry as Freddy in Security Breach makes INFINITELY more and better sense, than having Freddy be Michael... with all the Dad-vibes Freddy was giving off throughout the whole game.
And it also makes more sense if Charlie is really spreading her haunting influence throughout the pizza plex... Henry and Charlie, father and daughter, working together to stop William Afton. I LOVE that!
It makes sense cuz of “dad vibes” yea
Feel like Glamrock Freddy gives off equal amounts of Dad-vibes as he does Big-brother vibes.
I'll say he gives more brother vibes given the parallels between Gregory and the Crying Child. I fail to see how Henry being Freddy makes more sense.
That would just shit all over the story of FNAF 6 and UCN
This is my new favourite theory for the exact reasons you just listed
My biggest problem with the idea of Mike being partners with william is Henry's speech. When Henry says "to my brave volunteer", the way he speaks is very kind as if he's speaking to someone with a common goal of destroying everything.
That’s a feeling I get I can totally agree that we could be playing mostly as Henry and I think at first Mike might have been helping his dad out I mean would he have truly known what his dad was doing could have just been told basic stuff but after Sister location he knows the truth and knows he has to stop his dad maybe he meets up with Henry at some location and come up with this plan and he volunteers to finish the job
maybe mike switches to henrys side after he got scooped? Then he feels betrayed or something?
@@HydraPiggy that still disagrees with his idea of that Mike did all this for William. SL most likely happens b4 all the other games so he would be scooped and go to the pizzaria locations looking for his father
@@muslimdio that's true if you agree with id's fantasy fnaf SL placement but in this funhaff theory its clear although it must have been built before fnaf 1 through 3 Michael really goes only After William gets locked up in the safe room which makes lots of sense (not that matpat + id's fantasy doesnt make any, truth might lié between those two)
Even though the age barely aligns, what if the Jeremy Fitzgerald is Henry?
Wow. Now I need to watch MatPat's reaction to this, which will probably be split into two or three hour-long parts. What a great theory! John never disappoints.
No
At least four, what with the micheal section.
amazing theory I just wonder why I’m fnaf 6 Henry told the player character “mike” he had a escape route for him but knew that mike wanted to stay. My question is did mike changes his way a became good or did Henry told the truth and what he doing and need stop what he was doing
@@itzsoulja5944 So Michael is a rotting corpse at this point and his life is eternal suffering. I think at this point he
A) Just wants to die already
B) He's actually reunited with his family in FNAF6 since William and Elizabeth are there(well and Ballora as his mother maybe), so he finally achieved his goal and can move on
No it's cherry picking watch what Henry says last in the fire.
It's amazing seeing John grow from a couple thousand subs as a fnaf news channel to this amazing theorist solving so much of the lore. You are amazing John, keep it up!!
i love how you put such a different spin on the fandom's collectively-accepted "canon" and, while i may not agree with everything, i still love seeing people tackle this entirely-too-complicated lore from different points of view. keep up the great work!
John is a different type of theorist but in a good way. In an amazing way actually. I feel like he relays back on old theories either makes them make sense, or just dives deeper into them and makes things seem a lot more easier to understand. I really hope John gets the love he deserves more cause he’s honestly an amazing theorist.
Agreed
He's diving back to strengthen our foundations. Can't build anything without a good foundation. I really like all these new theorists entering the field. Right or wrong, they give us a new perspective which is so crucial right now.
amazing theory I just wonder why I’m fnaf 6 Henry told the player character “mike” he had a escape route for him but knew that mike wanted to stay. My question is did mike changes his way a became good or did Henry told the truth and what he doing and need stop what he was doing
My head cannon will always be dream theroy
@@itzsoulja5944 stop spamming this everywhere
Neat to see a theory with Henry as the protagonist. It makes his role in the story way more impactful, because otherwise if Michael is our POV character for all of the games, then the game is almost entirely Afton family with the Emily family almost being a footnote. While Michael is definitely the POV character in at least a couple of the games, it doesn't necessarily mean he's the protagonist of *every* game.
Agreed. I definitely believe that in some games, we were Michael and in others, we were Henry. Both were trying to atone for the mistakes they made that ended up taking a loved one’s life (Henry couldn’t protect Charlie, and Michael caused his brother’s death.) Maybe Michael went at the the wrong way, but at the end, both Michael and Henry brought William down (until he became a virus lol)
THIS! I still do not believe that we are Michael in fnaf 3- the dudes literally breathing and hallucination due to lack of oxygen
But the Emily family has always been a footnote, they're dumb unnecessary book characters that were shoved into the games for no reason
@@Quinhala11 HAhahaha. You have no idea who Springtrap really is? Out of everyone and everything. He is Sammy Emily and he's been in that suit far longer than William Afton. This the monster Henry has enabled for several games.
It’s a little more poetic, maybe, because it really still pits the two competing restaurant creators against each other as well.
At this point I don’t care about the actual lore and solving it, it’s just fun to watch different theories/timelines/aus and how people interpret the backbone of the FNAF’s story, and this one was pretty unique, good job.
Me too i love watching theory vidsosd
S
This is so nuanced, yet brilliantly simplistic. I love theories that are so good they make the scales fall from your eyes and have you just drop a ton of useless baggage. Motivation is key to unlocking every part of this mystery; and little details like having the Aftons bring the animatronics into their home/bunker opens up explanations for obscure things no one wants to talk about, like why the trick-or-treaters saw animatronics inside the Afton house.
Every returning villain needs a returning hero to take them on!
Yeah, I think I’ve killed too many Polish people with my Russian rifle musket
Not always
I mean, it's not really black and white, there aren't really "heroes"
I was not expecting to find you here in the comments!!! 😂
Jojo disagrees
I love that you try to look for theories from other perspectives and don't settle for what is supposed to have already been discovered. Your theories are always very interesting because they make you think. It reminds me of the old days of FNAF and I love it!
amazing theory I just wonder why I’m fnaf 6 Henry told the player character “mike” he had a escape route for him but knew that mike wanted to stay. My question is did mike changes his way a became good or did Henry told the truth and what he doing and need stop what he was doing
@@itzsoulja5944 “I have a feeling that’s not what you want. I have a feeling you are right where you want to be.” I think all Mike wanted was to be reunited with his family, no matter how. Even to burn with them.
Thinking about it now, Mike returning in FFPS to join back with William makes no sense when William, Baby etc continue to kill him. William is much more intelligent than the others and would recognize his son, thus not wanting to kill him.
You have 2 top comments, nice
That is terrible, if he trully belives in what he is saying, worth making a video for it, shouldn't he use it?
If he does belive this is the true story (this video has a lot of flaws either way) why does he come up with completly different things? Is he just trying to figure all paths possible so he can get one right?
Dude this video was so well done! I think your pacing and storytelling is one of the easiest to follow in the theory crafting side of fnaf and this one specifically makes a lot of sense. The pieces come together very nicely 👏
I honestly love this idea. It makes the Freddy/Foxy cutscenes make a lot more sense, and helps make sense of why Glamrock Freddy wasn’t hostile.
I mean, hey, if William can upload his consciousness into an AI virus, why not Henry?
Whether this theory is right or wrong it presents an incredibly different perspective of the whole story of fnaf, and one that makes a lot of sense at that. You're definitely shaking up the theory scene with this one, amazing job
This is the most correct comment on this video
I have a slight issue with this. In the books, Michael is always portrayed by characters who “good” as opposed to “evil”. For instance, there’s a Fazbear Frights story where a mother buys an old Freddy head for her son inadvertently causing him to be possessed by a spirit that was attached to the item. A security guard named Michael helps her to free her son from the spirit’s grasp.
I agree with you, I think there’s too much that paints Michael as a good guy freeing spirits as shown in game, and saving the innocent - again case in point what you just said about ‘Mike’ the security guard. Not to mention, Michaels ‘I’m going to come find you’ is ominous, and furthermore William literally tries to kill Michael in FNAF 6 - “Bittersweet…but fitting!” (Which I don’t know why he’d say this if they were working together) - If they were working together, to ‘put back their family’, why on earth would William be willing to remove a member of the family? It just does not make sense, and in terms of narrative, it makes far more sense for Michael to be our protagonist.
Johns given an interesting interpretation, but with all the evidence we have, and considering you could apply a lot of the points John made to Michael as well, (for instance, Glamrock Freddy doesn’t necessarily need to act like a father for it to be Henry, as Michael was also a grown man when he died and he spent the next 3 decades undoing his fathers work, he could very much act like a father or an older sibling, which can still be a caretaker as well as the fact that it’s possible the UCN cutscenes just reflected the Afton siblings - with Michael being the fox, Elizabeth being mangle (considering the toy mangle in her room) and crying child being Freddy as he’s associated with bears (Henry was also associated with Fredbear much like the crying child) And considering the things the fox did to the bear - he made him make the fox breakfast, he made Freddy take care of a pet etc, it just seems like it’s hardly showing William as again, the things the fox is making the bear do is hardly evil lmao, it’s what I imagine an older brother would make their younger sibling do in a teasing manner).
The point is, there’s much much more painting Michael as a good guy trying to stop his father, rather than a villain. It’s a cool interpretation, but I think that’s all it is. Sorry for the rant btw ;-;
Mike is good the odor is from his decaying corpse since he has been scooped and is now decaying he was tampering with the robots trying to break them down completely the ghost recognise him due to them knowing what he did to their friend his brother he is seeking redemption by putting a stop to William the evidence he chose for this theory is so flimsy it doesn't stand on its own the story around it makes this theory crumble
He might first be a grieving brother helping his dad correcting his mistake, reviving his brother. Ofcourse he would do everything to revive his brother he killed. However, after William starts killing, then returns as a corps himself, then his sister also dies, and his sister revived sister betrays and kills him, I think he was done with reviving his brother. Furthermore, I think once again, he was willing to correct his mistakes in helping his father, ending the madness.
@@mackthisarrowhearth295 Have to largely disagree - obviously I agree that the crying child’s death was something that Michael deeply regretted and he grieved over (as evidenced by Michael having the nightmares) - but all this about Michael helping William make the crying child anew is simply speculation with 0 proof. The only time Michael had helped William was during sister location, in which he was more so a scapegoat and puppet for William, as evident by him literally dying because he looks like William - “They thought I was you…” - which is further supported by the ventriloquist doll and the puppeteer who looks like the doll, implying that Michael was merely a puppet to William. Which, Michael was only assisting William here because his sister was mentioned, not because of anything crying child related, as there’s no mention of ‘him’ or ‘he’ in Sister location, only ‘Her’ from Michael.
Not to mention William started killing in 1985 and was caught on tape and even arrested for it, only getting away as they could never find the bodies, but largely everyone knew he had done it and he essentially was, I imagine, ousted from the company and this was back in 85 when Michael would’ve likely still been a teenager roughly, in other words when he was unable to help William by working at locations. I think the only reason Michael had helped his father initially with sister location was because of the promise of his sister and possibly finding her or helping her, which, once Elizabeth/Circus Baby, mistook him for William, he realised he’d more or less been sent to die and as such, also learnt about the trapped souls and went on a journey to stop his father and free the souls alongside it. That’s the extent I’d say Michael ‘helped’ William, not what was proposed in this theory, which definitely paints Michael as a villain, which is just faaar too big a stretch considering all we know - especially as it’s literally paralleled and plain to see that William was an abusive father. Again it’s a interesting IDEA, but that’s all I think it is - an idea. There’s not really any concrete evidence for it.
youre also forgetting scott likes to use important names over and over again to troll us look at jeremy for example and also you should not be looking into frights for lore clues
Every time I listen to one of your theories, it always feels like fresh air because it’s a completely different take with the same and if not new pieces put together and it just… makes sense
When Henry says "to my brave volunteer", the way he speaks is very kind as if he's speaking to someone with a common goal of destroying everything.
This honestly adds so much more to Henry’s character arc. Michael Afton WANTING to bring his family back even if he had to work with his serial killer father. Henry taking on more of a hero role. It’s a refreshing new take! I can’t wait though to see Michael’s perspective once the movie comes out!
But it makes no sense in FNAF SL when Michael talks to his father the tone of voice and everything is out of pity and in the books his always portrayed as good even the new FNAF movie from what we know has Michael as a great guy so the theory is absolutely bullshit it ignores everything
There's something that I remembered after seeing how the Glamrock animatronics get stunned by the camera. It's a line in FNAF 2 that goes: "Those older models would always get disoriented by bright lights. It would cause a system restart or something. Come to think of it, that glitch might have carried over to the newer models too". Maybe the Animatronics in Security Breach still have remnants of that code from all the way back then?
seeing the word 'remnant' anywhere just sets off something in my brain thanks to this series.
@@Hellknight101 Yeah, same here lol.
That would be so cool lowkey
Dang, Fazbear is so corrupt that a design glitch from the 1980's is still present in new robots decades later
You mean like...the FAZ-CAM! 📸 -dun dun duun-
I really like your theory!! Just a few questions though
1. If Micheal is who we play as on fnaf 6, and he is indeed working with William, why does he get attacked by William throughout the game? Especially with those voice lines
And although the voice lines can be taken as William talking to Henry, Henry just cannot be the person we play as during fnaf 6, cause, you know
And 2. The final scene of fnaf 6 implies that the player, Micheal, wants to stay and burn down with everything else, but why would the Micheal who is working with Aston try and burn everything down?
Annddd 3, if it is Henry we play as during fnaf 1 , why does the fnaf 4 protagonist(who i believe to be Mike, but that doesn't rly matter ) remember the phone call from phone guy?
I really really think you're on to something with this theory, but i think sne pieces are mismatched
Great theory overall though!
Dude, you are my FAVORITE fnaf youtuber. I absolutely love the fact that you are constantly pushing new theories that shift perspectives away from the more mainstream theories, and I feel like every time you come closer to solving the story - or at least you're able to make the story make more sense! You have such an eye for small details and putting all the pieces together (pun certainly intended) - amazing work, and I can't wait to see the next theory video! Huge, huge fan.
Rlly love the fact that John pulled a theorist and started popping out videos that contribute A LOT to the community
Good on you, John, good on you
I think this is probably one of my favorite theory videos I have seen from anyone in quite awhile. I must admit I was skeptical when you went to bringing up the box. But I feel you made some really validating points throughout the video that I haven't seen brought up. Good job with this!
it's a decent theory. personality i dont believe it's even close to being correct, but it's nice he's trying to think of every possibility
It's a cool theory but it doesn't work because at the end of fnaf 6, aka Henry's speech, it completely contradicts the theory, because there would be no suitable volunteer for the main character. They can't be a random person because henry says that he feels that they wouldn't want to escape, and it can't be anyone related to the story besides Michael. And why would Michael help Henry?
@@TwistyTurbine maybe when Michael was helping William, he didn’t know that his dad was the one who killed the kids in the first place. That would allow him to be helping his father collect the haunted endos and still be a willing participant to burn everything for Henry once he found out the truth about everything his father had done.
@@TwistyTurbine So I was just wondering that too, and I think I solved it. Michael doesn't know that he's working with Henry. Like we never learn any of the plan or who's running things until the end when Henry gives the speech. And presumably Michael is a walking corpse at this point. I'd assume he may just want to go out with his family. He wouldn't have much of a life on his own, as a purple corpse. So it would make some sense he could just accept his death at that point. And even assuming that he doesn't want to go out that way Henry doesn't give him that choice, Henry says that he thinks Michael is where he wants to be, not that he knows or has talked to him.
awesome theory, john!!! so proud of you for coming up with new ways to view the lore! you always offer a unique perspective and you can genuinely tell that you're doing what you love. this one really got me thinking about everything we thought we knew.
I really like this iteration of the story more, it really keeps the depth of the characters and detail in it. This sounds more like a final recap that you would want to tell new fans than other theories I have heard so far
The detail of Foxy having a "right hand man" in Mangle in the Samurai Freddy cutscenes absolutely convinced me that William and Michael were working together, not against each other like we've been thinking. And Henry as the one going to the old pizzerias and becoming Glamrock Freddy fits really well narratively. I'm curious to see where people take these ideas going forward
It explains why the bonus poster shows Michael as William's wooden dummy (crying child is the fanged bear and Elizabeth is the clown ofc)
@@cursedGalataea Michael is the bear, Elizabeth is the clown, and Charlie is the puppet.
wow this actually feels complete and whole. I always thought henry was really under used a character and this just makes SO much sense narratively. fantastic job!!!
john I just want you to know that you liking my comment made my whole week. i’m a huge fan of yours! :-)
I’ve never watched a fnaf “theory” video and felt it more right, tied up some loose ends and made the whole thing feel a lot, and I mean A LOT more clear. Nice job! Love your work don’t stop I’ll keep watchin!
i guess it's always good to see new perspectives, but it definitely does not sit right and has a lot more holes and questions than micheal being good
This completely flips everything we thought we knew on its head, and I absolutely love it. Henry as the main protagonist in fnaf 3 and as Freddy in security breach makes a ton of sense, and from a narrative standpoint it’s incredibly satisfying. Old pee paw Willy and Henry have been going at it this whole time, and it’s been right under our noses.
I’m disagree with Henry being the FNAF 3 player.
@@garrettmurphy2447 It makes total sense. There is a big reason why Springtrap is the only one who attacks the player in fnaf 3 NO OTHER ANIMATROICS are there. So its basically a 1v1 situation inside Fazbear Frights, Now imagine how weird it would be if Micheal was the player in Fnaf 3. Micheal would never burn his own Father since Micheal is on William's side and always obeys him. And Setting fire to things in hopes of stopping William is a Henry thing since he does is in Fnaf 6
@@maxx375 that's if you assume Michael IS on his Father's side which is not necessarily the case.
Also, one time burn does not have to be "Henry thing", considering high temperatures destroying remnant is an in-universe established fact.
My dude, your audio is vastly improved from your earlier theories. The music is impactful but not drowning your voice out, and you make good use of silence and tension when needed. Bravo, you're really growing as a creator.
This theory turns the story into two familys desperately clashing as they try to put themselves back together and it changed my whole perspective on the story.
Thank you
you are honestly so refreshing. i’ve rewatched all of mat’s videos several times but your perspective is so new and original!
okay, but why then Michael in fnaf 6 changed his side to help Henry and burn what he was trying to do?
This is just what I was looking for, everyone else seemed to ignore Michael's speech where he talks about doing what was asked and "finding her" clearly he was in on the plan and you hit the nail on the head
True maybe at first he was tricked and was helping to put the family back together but after the craziness feel like he might have changed his mind and plotted to stop his dad
Yeah because he didn't know William was a serial killer then he finds out the truth and we get the secret dialogue were he talks to his dad out of pity and shame after becoming a corpse so no it doesn't make sense
Between this and GT, I am extremely happy with the way everything has been laid out. Matpat laid the ground work and this video ties it all up very nicely. Separate they are great but together, they are amazing! Great work!
As much as I love the theory of *Michael being the possessed spirit of Glamrock Freddy therefore making his whole arc come full circle,* I hate to admit how Henry also fits Glamrock Freddy.
Man, this theory is so good….
EXCEPT FOR ONE THING. There is no way that Michael is a villain. I am baffled at such a suggestion. And that’s for one simple reason: in Ultimate Custom Night, the Vengeful Spirit says that they will keep coming back, no matter how many times _they_ burn them.
I’m paraphrasing, let me clarify. The Vengeful Spirit with keep coming back no matter how many times MULTIPLE PEOPLE burn the spirits. That seems to pretty heavily imply that Henry AND Michael have tried to burn the animatronics to save them. And this still lines up with the interpretation of the hallucinations being of something that’s GOING to happen; if Michael were in the office and planned to burn the attraction down to try and kill his father, HE WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO HAVE HALLUCINATIONS OF BURNED ANIMATRONICS.
On top of that, what would be the point of playing as Michael in nearly EVERY SINGLE GAME if he was just some goon working for Afton the whole time? I think the VERY clear explanation here is not that Michael’s just a bad guy with good intentions, it’s that he starts out being manipulated by Afton, THEN GETS HIS ASS SCOOPED BY THE ANIMATRONICS BECAUSE HE WASN’T WARNED ABOUT THEM AND HE TURNS ON AFTON. This is heavily implied in Michael’s ONLY SPEAKING ROLE, his big speech at Fazbear’s Fright. His speech is filled with a tone of anger towards his father, while still coupled by the personality seen in FNaF 4. I mean, he literally scoffs at the idea of the animatronics mistaking him for William, which seems to imply that he wasn’t told about anything to do with them doing EXACTLY THAT!
The idea that Henry is Glamrock Freddy is pretty interesting, and is definitely a good possibility… but to use your own phrase against you, I need more proof. There’s so many parallels between Michael and Freddy, and, like… a couple between Henry and Freddy. This is very clearly shown in the Princess Quest ending, where Gregory represents the Crying Child, Vanessa represents Elizabeth, and Freddy represents Michael. The significance of that moment would be nonexistent if it was just Henry. Instead of some big reunion, it’s just kinda… Henry chilling with some people he saved.
I think you definitely had some great ideas here, but you really lost me with saying that Michael’s a bad guy, and however much I like the _idea_ of Henry being Glamrock Freddy, it just doesn’t have enough evidence.
I think based on the fact that William and Michael didn't have the best relationship in the midnight motorist minigame, I would argue that them working together just a few years later doesn't make the most sense. I think that Michael talking to William in the special cutscene at the end of sister location always seemed like it was more in a sense of pity toward his father who had become this monster, rather than a sense of longing toward his partner in crime. I also 100% believe that the phantoms are the spirits haunting Micheal, the same why they likely are in the security log book.
yeah and henry refers to, what we assume to be michael, as "my brave volunteer"
LMAO. That minigame stars Henry and his son, Sammy Emily. Springtrap (Sammy Emily) hates Henry for a reason and Henry admits that he created him, the monster, and enabled him. In fact, this explained why the MCI killer knew there was a boy in front of Fazbears. He knew his son was trying to inside of Freddys.
@@justice8718 wait, wait wait wait wait, I may not have personally read the Silver Eyes trilogy, but Sammy was the kid we thought died, but it was actually Charlie. William Afton is still Springtrap though, there's no mistake about that. The minigame being about Henry and Sammy is . . . possible although we have absolutely no evidence Sammy exists in the games, but what exactly are you talking about here?
@@ShuraEssays In the books. Sammy is a nobody. In the games. He's evil and Henry regrets ever fathering him:
"It's only now that I understand the depth of the depravity of this creature. This monster, that I unwillingly helped to create."
If you look back at Save him, it still makes no sense for the boy to be Charlie. They have different expressions, genders, and clothes. It has to be someone Charlie knows about and cares about. What magenta guy Henry, the Midnight Motorist avatar who drives a Magenta car in a sea of purple cars, knows about and despises enough to kill.
Hell. As Springtrap, Sammy makes himself look wearable till any poor saps wear him and lose their souls to him. Just like William Afton in fnaf3. Both William Afton and the managers at Freddys warned everyone to not wear this springlock suit in particualr, because it's purposely failing and no amounts of procaution or fixes will ever make safe to wear it. "Management has also been made aware, that the Spring Bonnie animatronic, has been noticeably MOVED. We would like to remind employees, that this costume is not safe to wear under ANY circumstances."
Fnaf4's "Fun with Plushtrap" is literally a recreation of the hell William dealt with in his first week in the fnaf2 location (being its only nightgaurd at the time) and he had to deactivate this kiddie-killing bastard as it marched for his throat. "I will always came back" is a phrase Sammy uses because William, Fazbears, and Henry (his og killer) sealed him away before the events of fnaf3.
@@justice8718 when did WIlliam becomes Sammy? He was never mentioned in the games
I love this. It really addresses all the points Scott tried to make, and all the questions I still had. I think leaning in to Scott's stated intent has to be the right solution.
Awesome research, John!
Okay, this is actually kind of revolutionary, even if only for it daring to break past assumptions about Michael being the overall protagonist. Great job thinking outside the box.
We love John, even when your theories are very new and different
Especially because they are new and different. 😊 Easy to get stuck in an information loophole if you only follow one persons logic.
Unlike a lot of people, I think, I actually play the games and not just theorize
Pathetic
'different'
@@gamingwithalex2008his theories of late have been dead on for the most part though. As we gain new content, his theories line up. So I’m not sure where disproven comes into play when there isn’t official source material to confirm either way.
I like how the title is no longer about solving specific things like Security Breach, no, it's literally just "I solved Fnaf"
john another absolute banger- fnaf has been my special interest since middle school (i’m in college now) and i am obsessed with these types of videos and looking at everything different! you rock my man
I kind of love this… except it now leads to a lot more questions about Michael, but, this would make a TON of sense. Man, part of me wants this series to end so Scott can confirm some things for us 😂😂. John, you absolutely have done something here, potentially something very messy, but something for sure 😂
If Mike is teamed with William and goes to the Fnaf 6 pizza place looking for William to complete the family who is "the brave volunteer who somehow found this job listing not intended for you" that Henry mentions in the insanity ending?
I agree with the majority of this theory, it makes sense and is very clear. But there’s just little things that don’t match up, like how Henry said “my brave volunteer”, it doesn’t sound like Henry is working alone unless Henry just speaks in 3rd person. Like, is Michael a vigilante or something
Or how circus baby killed Elizabeth, if William was killing to rebuild his family why was the bear that killed the crying child built with such a powerful bite force. I guess it could be written off as an accident and crying child died before Elizabeth, but even that doesn’t line up, since Elizabeth is represented to have died before crying child. This is still a good theory though.
Right, not to mention he states that the job was not "intended for you." If Henry knew both William and Michael were working together (collecting Remnant), then it would be safe to assume that he would attempt to stop both of them, not just William. Accidentally trapping both father and son (while leaving an escape for said son) just doesn't hold water. Not to mention MatPat's theory of each of them (Freddy, Gregory, Vanessa) representing each of the Afton children (Michael, Crying Child, Elizabeth) is more thematically solid. They do what William never could, make their family whole.
@@DigitalContainer exactly.
This is 1000% one of the best theories I’ve seen in a LONG time. Makes me rethink the entire franchise. At this point in the series I think you need to have separate theories; the canon story and the story you like. So even though good Michael/Glamrock Freddy Michael is my personal headcannon, I think that this is the true cannon 👏🏻 Thanks for posing such a good theory.
This is probably one of the only videos youve made that didnt make me go “that doesnt sound right…” you actually made a LOT of sense and brought out really great points! Amazing work!! Keep it up!
im liking a lot of this. Some criticisms on methodology;
are we considering henry's "day to rest" coinciding with the "summer hires" transfer to day shift just happen to have both happened on the 7th day in FNAF 2? Coincidence? feels stretchy
i cant call specifics now, but weren't some of the hallucinations by the "player" things that only Michael would have seen? Like the nightmare versions or the "shadow" versions of them in fnaf 2?
and i always got the feeling that when playing as Michael in sister location, he was never clued in to what was actually going on, like he was just following vague clues left by his father. Some of his actions just come across as clueless and inquisitive rather then a "partner" in Williams plans.
and finally is Michael's involvement in pizzeria simulator. henry talks to him at the end as if he's innocent, looking to right his wrongs or make amends hence his willingness to die in the pizzeria with them.
Just throwing these ideas out there to get the juices flowing. Happy Theorizing!
I think the best and most acurate way to start any FNAF theory video from now on is with the words "We were wrong"
I love the theory and how you always look at these games from a different perspective. My only thing about this theory is why would Michael be fine with all of the murder if a he regrets killing the person he killed and b dying himself and knowing that you of pain?
This is absolutely- shocking. I have never seen a FNAF lore video make sense usually besides MatPats, But this one was actually different. Spectacular job! This is a great theory. One that actually makes sense.
Holy crap, I don't think I've seen a theory push a story so much away from what the fandom has considered "canon", while still making so much sense. Henry being so much more involved in the story, Michael being so much more antagonistic, a lot of small details fall into place like this! This makes me wonder though, what if Gregory is a robot that Charlie is manifesting into? Father and Daughter, together again, both trapped in animatronics because of the Afton family. This is something I would need to go back and look at the evidence to consider more, but with the acceptance that Gregory is a robot and that the Marionette is present in the Pizzaplex in some way, perhaps there's some merit to be found here?
That could be a lot of fun actually. You even have the parallel that was assumed to be the Afton children. All victims of Afton rather than his children.
That could be my headcanon: Charlie vacates the Puppet after they were caught by LEFT-E and possesses Gregory. Glitchtrap corrupts the Pizzaplex Crew leading them (along with Vanny, Music Man, Moon and the Endos) to prevent Gregory from stopping William Afton's resurrection as Burntrap.
But in the character encyclopedia it says Gregory's a human
@@me-km5zt It also skips talking about Mike, I don't necessarily trust the encyclopedia until further information verifies it's claims. I just hope the Ruin DLC has clues on human vs robot Gregory.
@@MorningDusk7734 Yeah I agree
I love that you confidently change "staple" ideas in the lore. Whether they turn out to be wrong or right, I love that you bring new stuff to the table and make us think about things differently.
I love this Theory John! Thank you for this. I would love to see Matpats reaction on this. Keep up the good work!
I love your theories! Especially how you look at it so differently than everyone else. The only thing I'm struggling with is that you're saying after the FNAF 2 Night 5 phone call that mentions "contacting the original owner", this sparks Henry to return and is the night guard you play as in FNAF 2. If that's true then that means Henry did not enter FNAF 2 until after Night 5's phone call so Henry couldn't have been the night guard for the 5 previous nights. Other than that it's very compelling and I can't wait to see what your next theories are!
Michael as a villain is one of those weird ones that are possible but require a lot of stuff to happen offscreen.
It is surprising that this is coherent,and possible that Scott deliberately made Michael a weird twist villain.
Interesting one
Can't wait for MatPat to turn this into multiple hour long videos.
you say that like its a bad thing i LOVE long videos compared to these
@@delta6704 Oh no, I like the long videos too. I'm referring to where he doesn't even get to watch the whole video because he was busy talking about the first minute for the full hour.
Your theory videos are legit really interesting! I love the new perspectives. Love them and keep going!
I like this theory a lot. And understand why you put it. It tries to connect the loose lines much tighter. But I have 2 critiques:
1) In Fnaf Simulator, Henry’s speech towards Michael Afton was, very hospitable. He wasn’t hostile to him at all. And even then, assuming you play Michael in Fnaf Sim, Baby’s interaction with Mike is almost as if she tricked him. As she was an enemy to both her and her father’s plan.
If Henry even gave an escape route for Michael in the burning of the animatronics, and Baby is hostile to us, this only means that Michael must be in Henry’s side.
To add more to this, if Michael reads the paragraph 4, then he is somewhat aware what the place was. So if he knew that the place is to lure everyone in, he would’ve warned them of the plans of Henry and why they are all there.
2) Assuming that we’re playing as Henry in Fnaf 2 and 3, the time skip is just, ridiculously large. Not to mention your explanation that Fnaf 2’s nights 1-6 are all Henry’s and that the last one is Michael is conveniently placed to simply avoid the hole that the security guard is tampering with animatronics and has odor.
I simply don’t think Scott would put such an insanely complicated and as if convenient placement of POV in the games without mentioning of character switch just to make a smooth narrative.
Let me start by saying that I absolutely love the work you're doing, and I hope you continue for many years to come! I adore seeing so many new perspectives on the lore for a game series that I've been intensely studying since day 1, and your ideas are always fresh and new that force us to ask some really important questions :)
I do have a few issues with this particular theory, however. In my eyes, the games make more narrative and evidentiary sense if the protagonist is Michael and not Henry. There are a few counter-points that popped into my head while watching this theory, but these are the biggest:
If Henry is the security guard we play as in all of the games (minus Sister Location and Pizzaria Simulator) then why would Henry be receiving hallucinations of "It's Me" from Golden Freddy when Henry has a limited connection to Crying Child (sure they might have had a deeper relationship than we're aware of, but that would be pulling evidence that doesn't exist even through inference).
Secondly (and perhaps the most important), even if Henry was just the security guard in FNaF2 (which your whole theory is built on) why would the puppet attack him? I know what you might be thinking; "she's just a possessed animatronic, maybe she's attacking on instinct, maybe she doesn't recognize him" which might all be valid arguments if not for one of the puppet's lines in UCN; "The others are like animals, but I am VERY aware" which is flat-out stating that she is more sentient or intelligent than the other animatronics, which feels to me like pretty damning evidence against those arguments.
And lastly, If Michael was on William's side from the jump, why would he so suddenly change his mind and decide to help Henry capture and burn not only his father, but everything that he and his father had been working towards for 30-40 years in FNaF:PS? I believe that Henry's line of "And to you, my brave volunteer, who somehow found this job listing not intended for you, although there was a way out planned for you, I have a feeling that's not what you want. I have a feeling that you are right where you want to be" is meant to indicate to us that the protagonist of FNaF:PS is Michael, as he has reached the end of his family's "curse" (his father, brother, and sister all dying horribly and possessing robots, and himself being gutted and used like a purple meat puppet for months if not years and unable to die) and wishes to finally rest.
On top of those, I think the original story feels more narratively complete and satisfying if Mike is, in fact, our overarching protagonist throughout the series.
Yeah, its a cool way of looking at the events of the franchise, but its more of a "wouldn't it be interesting" than the actual truth.
Could it be that Michael helps out originally but the events of Sister location cause him to start working against William? I’ve seen a few theories lately that lay out evidence that Mike is somewhat complicit, at least at first. Not sure if I believe them, but it’s interesting to consider
THIS. Everything on this. Thank you
very good points. it makes no sense for Micheal to b helping his dad, why would he be a security guard, if not to be there to tear his dads work down? it makes no sense
@@mailpaper7754 I totally agree
A key issue is that Phone Guy clearly references Henry as the "original restaurant owner", as in the owner of the original restaurant, not the original owner of the restaurant. This is why he immediately follows up by naming Fredbear's Family Diner. The subject of the sentence is the restaurant, not the owner himself.
The FNAF 3 after night mini games have Freddy and Bonnie with their buttons. Who’s to say that the 8 bit characters that we saw are the withered robots all fixed up? And when they got fixed again, they look like the FNAF 1 animatronics.
Love your content like always John, you deserve all the love and respect.
btw help wanted says that all minor things like that are the maker of the games we play doing it wrong
One thing that might need reexamining under this is the logbook. I haven’t gone through it in a while but it shows a lot of Michael so it could make or break this theory. I also am not sure that Freddy in the UCN cutscene is Henry, as hunting down William Afton even after a partial victory sounds much more like the vengeful spirit than Henry.
Every one of your videos makes me see the lore in whole different lights and I leave them so proud of you John, you know what the fanbase can be like and you stick to controversial topics regardless, making sure that your ideas get out there no matter what people say. You constantly inspire me to pursue my goals through the fact that no matter what COULD happen, you always come back, not ridiculing people for disagreeing but listening to them, accepting their theories and responding, adding to yours and theirs in the process, you’re an amazing part of the fnaf community and I’ll always support your channel
I don't know how I feel about this take of Michael, but hey, maybe a few years down the line we'll be looking at it like dream theory and you were right and we couldn't accept it.
The timeline is such a mess that people can propose wildly different versions of the story and still feel compelling. It's why I like watching these vids.
I feel the same. Like... it makes sense... kinda??? But I HATE it. I hate it so much. I know it's because I don't want to see Michael that way, but... my brain just is NOT letting me fully process it. Plus I hate the explanation for fnaf 3.
@@MacKenzieAkari Funny enough it's the explanation of FNAF 3 that I liked the most of this theory lmao
John, im so happy you are doing long theories much more rather than daily fnaf news, love this, keep it up
John, not since GT’s revelation of the grandfather clock in FNAF 4, have I felt a mind blow like your connection of Scott’s Halloween post about the box to Henry’s “Paragraph 4” plan. 3:00 minutes in, no less
Yeah, I definitely don’t agree with the idea that Michael is helping William. The ending of fnaf 6 shows us that really clearly
Alright, I usually love your theories but this one is so far-fetched and can be easily destroyed by mere existence of Fnaf 6 or the fact that in Sister Location we literally see Michael talking to William in fnaf 3 location. I still think that our dear old Mike is a good guy who wants to make up for his fathers sins, it’s the best explanation and it fits fnaf 6 ending and Security Breach perfectly
Edit: and I’m pretty sure everybody in the fandom agreed that in those UCN cutscenes Freddy is Henry and Foxy is William, they definitely had a rivalry. Michael isn’t really a rival to his father, he just wants to right some wrongs
this makes SO MUCH SENSE and it’s also so cool that the rivalry between Henry and William will never end. I enjoy Henry being glamrock Freddy more than Micheal
I saw your video with Dan from GT and you spoke a bit about this theory so I knew it was coming…till Henry. What a great end. You kept the best part for this video and I’m glad you did because it was a surprise making me literally ’oooooo’ out loud. Well done Sir.
I like the explanation for the box, best one we have so far imo, idk about the protagonist Henry/ secondary antagonist mike part of the video, feels iffy to me
Can't wait for MatPat to react to this 13:40 video in two hour long segments!
Dude, the Talkback is going to be nuts. It's going to take 4 hours and we'll finally figure out something solid, but it's going to be what happened to Bon-Bon or something like that.
@@AlriikRidesAgain “Guys, guys! Bon Bon is actually Williams reflection of his kid, the crying child! William always saw himself as a crazy person (Funtime Freddy) and the crying child always calmed him down (Bon Bon), which is why he starts killing after the bite. He always wanted to kill, but his son held him back!”
@@purplecat6578 I don't know if it's an indictment on the storytelling of FNAF, the community for going wild on crazy ideas, or myself for having watched SO FREAKING MUCH of it.
I think this theory can still work without turning Mike evil,hear me out. As shown in the immortal and the restless, Michael is constantly being gaslit by the company and this logically extends to his father. I believe William is manipulating Michael into doing his dirty work rather than Mike being outright evil or willing to kill. The only reason i bring this up is because Michael in the log book is not characterised in a way that would suggest a malicious or grieving person. It does however reinforce the gaslighting and manipulation that Fazbear’s is putting him through.
Great theory overall, that was just my one gripe.
Loved this theory! But I think glam rock Freddie could have the spirits of both Michael and Henry possessing him because when you see the blob Freddy says something along the lines of “his friends are there”.
What I find fascinating is that the thought of Michael being a villain never really came to mind, at least for me. It was always just William and I think that this theory is really cool. A lot of it makes sense to me and again, the concept of having both William and Michael being the villain is different and unique. Your theories are always like that; bringing in an entirely new concept and making it make total sense. I love them!
*cough cough* Michael helps Henry in fnaf 6 *cough cough*
I've heard others say that Michael isn't necessarily a willing accomplice, but only following his father's orders out of fear for the consequences if he refuses or fails. Midnight Motorist pretty much confirms that Afton is an abusive father and/or an angry drunk. And I can certainly imagine his cold, barely-contained fury after what Michael did to his brother...
@@idontknowwhattoputhere224 *COugH* you are absolutely right cough cough he sounds like making William a threat in SL cutscene cough cough literally no where else we find evidence for Michael to be evil cough cough the theory we already have of Michael being good and coming after his father is actually a really good one but for some reason this man made the theory without testing to prove it can resist possible contradictions *COUGH* sorry John 3/10
@@idontknowwhattoputhere224 Not only that the rest of the theory has questionable parts and if we use the UCN cutscenes (that we already had connected Freddy-Henry Foxy-William before) in the Michael making up for his father's wrong doings, the Mangle in that cutscene fits Elizabeth perfectly fine (even better than Michael).
@@PHR16384Ah yes it’s not like we see his fathers fury in sister location when he quite literally sends him to die and after that game he basically hunts him down no where in the games or books is he implied to have “followed his fathers orders” so whoever told you this was just telling you a head canon💀
Many videos later, you still impress us with theories that we've never known or realized. Bravo, you've done it again!
John. Incredible theory. I love the way you look at things, this one really got me thinking! Way to go, Superstar, you're doing it!
Thank you 💙
I think this is quite interesting! I’ve been watching your theories for a little while now and some have definitely made me rethink A LOT about this series (you have me completely sold on the Into Madness stuff)
I’m a little iffy on this one. I think there is some interesting evidences that you brought up, and I’ll dive into that shortly, but I still think that overall Micheal was meant to end off being a protagonist.
I have some other point thoughts though that would align more with this theory.
I always found the poster that can sometimes can appear in Pizza Sim (the one that thematically depicts William, Micheal, Elizabeth and CC) a bit interesting with their portrayal of Micheal. He is deliberately shown as a small, hand-puppet version of William. (Which if we take the words of his of SL speech, it is implied that he looks just like his father.). It’s the fact he’s shown as a puppet to me. A puppet, who does not have his own control but is rather being used by the puppet master (which would be William). He is in control of Micheal.
If Micheal is meant to be depicted as Mangle on the anime scenes, it would also make sense. Mangle is designed to look like foxy. And if William is Foxy, Micheal “Mangle” looking like him again aligns with the SL speech (though this could be a thematic stretch)
Heck if you even want to try and fit Henry into FNAF 1, the “It’s Me” could be the Fredbear suit haunting Henry. “It’s Me, the suit that bit the CC and started it all” (I personally don’t believe this butjust a thought)
Now onto two little counter points/ideas that I have.
In one of the Fazbear Frights books (I haven’t read them myself so please forgive or correct me if im mistaken) isn’t there a sorry that is a direct parallel to FNAF 3? And if I recall, there was a lot of heavy implications/connections to Micheal in that book being the protagonist. (Having an abusive father or teacher?, tragic incident?) Obviously the books are not one-to-one on the games but perhaps this was Scott trying to subtly confirm the identity?
As others have brought up, the ending speech in Pizza Sim refers to the player character as a “brave volunteer” and says this job was never intended for us. We know Henry is the voice speaking to us. So if we are Micheal in Pizza Sim, and if Micheal was helping Willy A, why would he refer to us in such endearment? Or are we just a random person in FNAF 6 (though this seems highly unlikely to me)
I..admittedly cannot see Glamrocks Freddy being Henry. The line when he goes down to visit the FNAF 6 location in SB, he says “my friends are all here” (something along those lines) so would Henry be referring to all the dead kids/spirits as his friends? I suppose it could work but I don’t see it as solidly as perhaps Charlie, Micheal or even CC himself in Glamrocks Freddy.
To wrap this up, I believe your maybe half right. I do think that up until SL, Micheal was helping his father. Though I believe he had a change of heart during the events of SL (coming in to contact with Baby, his sister. And seeing the tormented souls of the Funtimes) perhaps he changed his mind and realized what his father was doing was inhumane or madness.
Thanks for reading my Ted talk lol
It’s amazing how well you do these theories and can still surprise us all, even if it leaves me mixed.
While it does make a LOT more sense for Henry to be more active in stoping William than just sitting back and hiding his time and Michael working alongside his dad, it also feels like it destroyed any sense of growth Michael could have had.
Where he’d sooner realize his dad is evil and not help him continue deaths that were his fault to begin with, Baby killing Elizabeth and the spring locks having enough bite force to break bone, and actually try and stop the psycho.
Don’t get me wrong, LOVE your theories, that’s just my own deal.
You guys and your stupid edgy brother theories.
I was a bit unsure at first but honestly, as it went on the theory made more and more sense, explaining things that didn't make sense before, great theory once again :D
I completely agree with Glamrock Freddy being Henry. Glamrock Freddy said “My friends are here” while talking to Gregory, and that part always boggled my mind. It wouldn’t make sense for Michael Afton to be saying that because none of his friends were victims. However Henry is the original creator of Freddy Fazbear’s and Friends. He would resonate more with that statement because he was the one who built the animatronics.
Great vid, on the topic of the dream geist, along with the toys and the box, there is also a grandfather clock which appears in fnaf 4.
While this would explain stuff like "Why would Michael do what Afton says in the fnaf sister location speech?" and "Why does Afton call out for Michael's help in the oldman consequences in Custom night?" as well as "What would Michael be doing the the fnaf 1 and fnaf 2 locations that happen before Sister Location?", i am pretty sure Michael is ment to be the hero of the story, else why would Henry say that "he had a feeling" that Michael would like to stay and burn along side everyone else is Custom night?
This is a really interesting angle. The evidence regarding the box is very clear-cut and well-done. I like the freshness of the take that Henry had a much more active role as a nightguard. However, and this is likely my bias talking, it is hard to imagine Michael only ever being a lackey to William. I think you have good evidence to support your point, though I wonder if there is any evidence that might suggest that Michael started out working for William but eventually changed his mind. For instance, in the FNAF 6 ending, it makes sense that Henry might have tricked Michael into not realizing he was helping with his plan, but then Henry says "although there was a way out planned for you, I have a feeling that's not what you want. I have a feeling that you are right where you want to be." If Michael were supporting William to the end, wouldn't Michael want to attempt to escape if not to at least try continuing the plan? Or did he change his mind at some point?
That said, the idea of Glamrock Freddy, if he is possessed by anyone, makes a lot of sense to be Henry. I never noticed the parallel with the "protect you" quote. Keep up the good work!
LOVE the last line, haven't gotten chills like that from a fnaf theory in a long time
This is such a clever angle. Great video, lots to think about! :)
Johns upload times are really random, but he has the best fnaf theories existing on youtube
Randomness is fun tho
i wouldn't say the best but it is very interesting and it makes you rethink of parts of the lore, which is good. Cause he's a theorist.
@@KlaSiKo4 I guess it’s different from people to people, but for me he‘s the best.
I'm sorry his theory's are the most easily disprovable and have already been disproved by mat pat you know the guy who basically helped Scott make FNAF lore which didn't originally exist
@@pyro1830 bruh this guy taking theories seriously lol
I think this theory is pretty good honestly, though I do believe Michael being good in the end is more compelling story wise than him actively helping his father. I do think he worked with his father in the beginning of the timeline but as he continued to do these things, I’d like to think he eventually started having doubts in his father, he started noticing that he was being used. Which sort of leads to him being the brave volunteer in FNAF 6, where he works against his father instead of with him. If Michael was desperate to bring back his brother? I definitely feel like it was only near the beginning that this goal was in the forefront of his mind but later on in 6- He seemingly is okay with staying to die in a fire. So I feel like Mike at some point, at least during the 30 year time span had a change of heart, or just had enough and realized that what he was doing isn’t going to make his life any better.
Really enjoyed this a lot. I think it fits better also. It fits with Michael and Henry both. Great job
SICK LINE DROP “IF WILLIAM ALWAYS COMES BACK, HENRY WONT BE FAR BEHIND HIM.”
take a Shot everytime someone solves FNAF Lore
Hope you got your doctor on the phone, lol.
I have become one with the shot
A shot of faz-goo
I have already perished
I love how you're giving Henry a more active role! Also giving Michael this motive to play security guard, to help bring his brother back. That aligns well with following his father's instructions to find Elizabeth.
Hi I'm back I just finished it and it is COMPELLING to see Henry as GF, I like where you're going! I'm real excited to hear your thoughts at the TalkBack!
This is one of my favorite theories yet I love this perspective of the franchise keep up the good work John! :)
henry as glamrock freddy blew my mind. i never once thought that could be the case but wow does it make so much sense. this is my favorite theory of yours so far!
This is really shattering some plot points of old theories, but it's definitely great to see new perspectives come into play with this franchise.
Honestly can't wait to see Matpat's hour-long reaction/breakdown with John also on the couch/on video call.
This was definitely a fun watch, gives me a bit of Matpat's energy with a neat twist.
Also you should make "Need More Proof?" into merch that would be funny