i personally think the way fnaf lore is left up to the fans to build on their own is a cool strat and its obviously successful. this sort of lorebuilding is for theorists, people who are interested in seeking out a deeper story in stupid experiences. obviously it isn't the best bc nobody can agree on what's going on, but regardless i think there's a beauty in it's nonsense. its obviously for a certain type of audience.
@@Garmazaddy I feel like a formal ARG captures this spirit pretty well. Many of the games and series trying to copy Fnaf have actually done a bit better because they had a concrete plan when they started
13:53 Steel Wool mentions Freddy Krueger in this interview as a villain with some depth; not born a monster, but created. But if you've seen A Nightmare on Elm Street, Freddy is a child-murderer from the start. Not the best example in my opinion.
As a fan of A Nightmare on Elm Street, I can fully confirm he was born a monster. I mean, he was born from a nun being gang-banged by asylum patients when she was accidentally locked in overnight, and the school kids bullied Freddy by calling him "the son of a hundred maniacs"; he was basically doomed to be a monster and psychopath from the get-go. If anything, a monster created would be like Jason Vorhees: he was born innocent but with a physical deformity that led to him being picked on by kids and eventually drowned at Camp Crystal Lake, then he came back vengeful.
This is a really well presented video. I absolutely wanted to like the narrative of fnaf for a long time, but you make a really good point. When youve decoded the story as much as is possible you dont really get anything poignant and it certainly doesnt feel worth it
1:55 mistake Scott always clearly pointed to experiments, it's just that our fandom got stuck in Perception Disks and dream theory, which was the players' fault because instead of looking at what they have in the game, they looked at everything else
@@Quintaspoon In my opinion this girl is a future victim of toy chica so she got the idea for the lack of a beak from there the dream theory itself makes no sense in the space of fnaf 4 because why in fnaf 4 can you hear the phone call from fnaf 1? why is there a puppet in fnaf 2 and also look fnaf when it developed was supposed to be a trilogy (fnaf 1-3) the dream theory would be a kind of retcon in the series and scott said that there was only 1 retcon knowing perfectly well that fnaf 4 is now experiments so what? scott would retcon the same place twice? first from real events to dreams and then, from dreams to real events?
I'm very glad this video exists. I have had many thoughts about FNAF over the years, but I remember feeling kinda broken and frustrated when I realized that Scott was, for a lack of a better word, a hack fraud who kept throwing stuff at the wall to see what stuck, and the only reason the first three games worked was because they had minimalist narratives that could survive most of his idiosyncratic tendencies (like making new assets for the same character for no reason). It really annoys me how a lot of the fandom still acts like he's some sort of genius who planned the details of his barebones-ass story meticulously and still keeps seeding hints out, especially since just about everybody ignores that he is not the sole mind behind the brand anymore unless they want to disprove some especially wild book/file name theory.
This video really needs to get more traffic and respect. You raise some very good points. I think what disappointed me most is, as you said, that Scott couldn't just let the plot end after FNAF 6. Both custom night and the FNAF VR would've stayed good and justified products even without the plot additions. Don't get me wrong, easter eggs are great, but at this point he could've left the games with non lore easter eggs, like Mr. Hippo's philosophical thoughts. It's okay to let stories end (especially when you rely on others to write the plot)
After ruin i watched the new matpat theory to see what was next. He went on to talk about the tunnels and their similarity to the tunnels in the books. Are we not gonna address that the mimic is free/dead? Cassie? Freddy? It doesn't help that Steel Wool wants to go back in time in the next games.
lowest form of horror might be the dumbest thing i have heard this month. if the animatronics we're never shown and the game relied on your imagination it wouldnt turn into scott cawthons goddamn magnum opus it would be boring as fuck. when you have a game reliant on replaying over and over again that doesnt work thats why slenderman did the same thing. Its like claiming stand up comedy is the lowest form of comedy because its easier than situational comedy. Regurgitating other peoples opinions about the creative process is a surefire way to ensure you never create anything that stands out.
@@WilliamWarner-zk7hk well i think once you cast doubt on whether something is really happening suspension of disbelief falls apart. I reference The Shining as a positive example of horror and exactly what’s behind the occurrences in that movie is open for discussion. However as the audience we understand that axe into body = dead. idk much about slender man but i think it’s implied he kills you in some awful way and i’m fine with the fact that that’s not explicitly explained. but again i don’t know how that’s different than fnaf. main point is that fnaf 4 has multiple competing explanations for what it is, with multiple competing stakes. getting jumpscared could literally just represent having a bad dream, or dying horribly, or something else we don’t know. really i think it’s clear that it can’t represent anything. so it’s horror mostly comes from the knowledge that a loud noise will be played in your already high volume headphones. i was at party once where we played a game with this shock potato. this was like a normal game of hot potato but the thing we played with would zap the loser and it hurt. now i was scared of being shocked, but that doesnt make it a horror game. i was just worried about being subjected to a negative physical stimulus. in that regard fnaf 4 isn’t standup comedy, it’s tickling someone and calling yourself a comedian.
The timeline with the White background at the beginning is so bad that I've lost any urge to watch this video, I won't even like it dislike the video I'm just not dealing with staying on this video with a timeline that horrible with notes even worse.
i personally think the way fnaf lore is left up to the fans to build on their own is a cool strat and its obviously successful. this sort of lorebuilding is for theorists, people who are interested in seeking out a deeper story in stupid experiences. obviously it isn't the best bc nobody can agree on what's going on, but regardless i think there's a beauty in it's nonsense. its obviously for a certain type of audience.
@@Garmazaddy I feel like a formal ARG captures this spirit pretty well. Many of the games and series trying to copy Fnaf have actually done a bit better because they had a concrete plan when they started
13:53 Steel Wool mentions Freddy Krueger in this interview as a villain with some depth; not born a monster, but created. But if you've seen A Nightmare on Elm Street, Freddy is a child-murderer from the start. Not the best example in my opinion.
@@DecoderWalrus I’m sure in nightmare on elm street 16 they establish he was bullied or something
As a fan of A Nightmare on Elm Street, I can fully confirm he was born a monster. I mean, he was born from a nun being gang-banged by asylum patients when she was accidentally locked in overnight, and the school kids bullied Freddy by calling him "the son of a hundred maniacs"; he was basically doomed to be a monster and psychopath from the get-go.
If anything, a monster created would be like Jason Vorhees: he was born innocent but with a physical deformity that led to him being picked on by kids and eventually drowned at Camp Crystal Lake, then he came back vengeful.
This is a really well presented video. I absolutely wanted to like the narrative of fnaf for a long time, but you make a really good point. When youve decoded the story as much as is possible you dont really get anything poignant and it certainly doesnt feel worth it
1:55 mistake Scott always clearly pointed to experiments, it's just that our fandom got stuck in Perception Disks and dream theory, which was the players' fault because instead of looking at what they have in the game, they looked at everything else
@@Teoriak I’d like to know why you think toy chica is missing her beak in fnaf 4, and why scott pointed that out
@@Quintaspoon In my opinion this girl is a future victim of toy chica so she got the idea for the lack of a beak from there
the dream theory itself makes no sense in the space of fnaf 4
because why in fnaf 4 can you hear the phone call from fnaf 1?
why is there a puppet in fnaf 2
and also look fnaf when it developed was supposed to be a trilogy (fnaf 1-3)
the dream theory would be a kind of retcon in the series and scott said that there was only 1 retcon knowing perfectly well that fnaf 4 is now experiments
so what? scott would retcon the same place twice?
first from real events to dreams and then, from dreams to real events?
This video deserves more views, you make a really good point
I'll be brave and say it: Kubrick's The Shining is better presented than FNaF
underated
I'm very glad this video exists. I have had many thoughts about FNAF over the years, but I remember feeling kinda broken and frustrated when I realized that Scott was, for a lack of a better word, a hack fraud who kept throwing stuff at the wall to see what stuck, and the only reason the first three games worked was because they had minimalist narratives that could survive most of his idiosyncratic tendencies (like making new assets for the same character for no reason).
It really annoys me how a lot of the fandom still acts like he's some sort of genius who planned the details of his barebones-ass story meticulously and still keeps seeding hints out, especially since just about everybody ignores that he is not the sole mind behind the brand anymore unless they want to disprove some especially wild book/file name theory.
This video really needs to get more traffic and respect. You raise some very good points.
I think what disappointed me most is, as you said, that Scott couldn't just let the plot end after FNAF 6. Both custom night and the FNAF VR would've stayed good and justified products even without the plot additions. Don't get me wrong, easter eggs are great, but at this point he could've left the games with non lore easter eggs, like Mr. Hippo's philosophical thoughts. It's okay to let stories end (especially when you rely on others to write the plot)
@@omersharon7847 So many franchises have marched on past death because they can make money, just sad really
But We have the movies
After ruin i watched the new matpat theory to see what was next. He went on to talk about the tunnels and their similarity to the tunnels in the books. Are we not gonna address that the mimic is free/dead? Cassie? Freddy? It doesn't help that Steel Wool wants to go back in time in the next games.
@@Amiss-8 After talking about a story with no plot for so long it is kinda hard to address the plot at all
@@Quintaspoon agreed
cool discussion video!
lowest form of horror might be the dumbest thing i have heard this month. if the animatronics we're never shown and the game relied on your imagination it wouldnt turn into scott cawthons goddamn magnum opus it would be boring as fuck. when you have a game reliant on replaying over and over again that doesnt work thats why slenderman did the same thing. Its like claiming stand up comedy is the lowest form of comedy because its easier than situational comedy. Regurgitating other peoples opinions about the creative process is a surefire way to ensure you never create anything that stands out.
@@WilliamWarner-zk7hk well i think once you cast doubt on whether something is really happening suspension of disbelief falls apart. I reference The Shining as a positive example of horror and exactly what’s behind the occurrences in that movie is open for discussion. However as the audience we understand that axe into body = dead. idk much about slender man but i think it’s implied he kills you in some awful way and i’m fine with the fact that that’s not explicitly explained. but again i don’t know how that’s different than fnaf. main point is that fnaf 4 has multiple competing explanations for what it is, with multiple competing stakes. getting jumpscared could literally just represent having a bad dream, or dying horribly, or something else we don’t know. really i think it’s clear that it can’t represent anything. so it’s horror mostly comes from the knowledge that a loud noise will be played in your already high volume headphones. i was at party once where we played a game with this shock potato. this was like a normal game of hot potato but the thing we played with would zap the loser and it hurt. now i was scared of being shocked, but that doesnt make it a horror game. i was just worried about being subjected to a negative physical stimulus. in that regard fnaf 4 isn’t standup comedy, it’s tickling someone and calling yourself a comedian.
FNaF 6 is my favorite FNaF game. The name's v clever. Bring back the business simulator aspect!
The timeline with the White background at the beginning is so bad that I've lost any urge to watch this video, I won't even like it dislike the video I'm just not dealing with staying on this video with a timeline that horrible with notes even worse.
MatPat overcomplicated the lore for views and then he lied about retiring (for views)