Also it’s interesting that the Ultimate Custom Night Golden Freddy scene is proceeded by text saying “You did it!” It could be literally interpreted as Michael telling William “YOU did this” and showing him springlocking his own son
I think it makes sense for Michael to revert to a more childlike voice because he's speaking to his father. It's not just a son speaking to his father, but a son who has been abused by his father. Michael may be getting his revenge against William in UCN, but William has always been the adult in Michael's psyche with Michael always being subservient to William because of the abuse. Bereft of his body by the fires and left with nothing but an angry, enraged soul driven strongly by emotions, it makes sense thematically for Michael to present himself as a kid. This is not the story of two adults battling it out, it's a story of revenge of a son against his father. Now storytelling wise, I think the answer is much simpler. Having an adult male voice actor for the vengeful spirit would have immediately given away the mystery. We know what Henry, William and Michael sound like, they've all had spoken lines in the games, so if they just went and used Michael's VA then everyone immediately knows what is going on, there is no mystery. And besides, Duel Theory Reaction makes a good point, we know who could possibly be the Vengeful Spirit because of who is in the building at the end of fnaf 6, no one else on the list makes anywhere near as much sense as it being Michael.
I think the only issue beyond that is that the voice isn't British. Michael has a clear British accent in his adulthood. But I think I can take a stab at an explanation. We see that Michael has a group of friends in '83, given that he's living in Utah, that means that he's had time to start acclimating to the accent of his peers. Then, after '83, being isolated with his father would have him start developing a similar accent as he wouldn't have much opportunity to talk with anyone else, at least going by the process of events Dual presented
The shookeneth is real. As I was listening to this theory unfold, the thought came to mind "this sounds so cool, it'd be awesome if it was a show or a game or something." XD
The reason I think Micheal would "revert" to a child after death, it's because he was never allowed to grow up. Not mentally, at least. He was probably neglected to the point of bullying his younger sibling for attention, and after that trauma, the younger sibling "went missing" (he probably didn't yet know William killed him). After that, his curiosity for the forest and what happened to Cassidy, was punished with torture. That brain was not allowed to become the one of a "fully socially acceptable grown-up". So, when he shows up to his father, he shows himself as a child. The child, that is not only the one he shouldn't have killed, but the one he abused and didn't allow to grow. "You did this to me. I was so young, and your doing is now back to hunt you." Micheal has always been my absolute favorite character in fnaf, and their theory made my heart soar and shiver! I don't know if I explained it well? I hope it's understandable!
I think William blames Michael for the deaths of both Cassidy AND Elizabeth because of obviously what he did to Cassidy, but also he was supposed to be the one watching Elizabeth and making sure she didn't go near the animatronics alone. But Elizabeth gave him the slip. That to me would explain his hatred of Michael but his love for his other two kids- Michael killed his siblings in William's eyes. I also think maybe Michael is deliberately, as a ghost, pretending to be a child because his father preferred to kill children. He wasn't going around killing just anyone to use in his experiments when statistically, he'd be more likely to fly under the radar using homeless people or sex workers, because the police generally dgaf about them. He was using children- innocent, trusting souls that William could easily overpower. As a ghost with no body he also has no vocal chords nor appearance, so he can pretend to be a child. That's my interpretation.
It really makes William out as a coward, going after smaller victims who would not have been able to overpower him, where as an adult, even in a more disheveled state, would easily be able to get away.
It also seems to be a younger version of Michael, younger than what we see in the Bite of ‘83 scene. Perhaps this is the form Michael takes to show William he’s no longer a victim of abuse. There had to be a reason Michael would bully his younger brother, Cassidy. Perhaps William babied Cassidy and gave him more attention. I mean, if he IS the crying child, then it looks like Cassidy cries a lot, or always looks like on the verse of tears. Abuse isn’t ALWAYS intentional. Neglect can be argued as a form of mental abuse. Perhaps he takes a form younger than anything we’ve seen because he doesn’t want to appear as a victim, he wants to appear as he did the last time he wasn’t abused by his father. Perhaps it’s to show William, “You have no hold over me anymore, Father.”
I have a theory on why the music box works for the puppet which makes William a bigger scumbag than he already is: Since William and Henry were friends before even maybe close he had to know Charlie and maybe witnessed Henry singing a specific melody to Charlie to calm her down or to sing her to sleep or alternatively Henry did the same thing but with a music box so he either found one that was similar to that melody or just bought the same one outright which would make sense as an effective distraction to Charlie as she would be attracted to something her Father used to do or use(And hey maybe this is how he figured She was Charlie after remembering that it was the puppet who discovered her body and this was his way of confirming it)
41:57 i think i commented this on the original theory vid too, but i think the simplest explanation is that the ghost children that attacked William here are most likely the kids from the _DCI_ not the MCI. They don't appear to be bound to any particular animatronics, at most they may be bound to the _building_ , and it kinda gives them a clean exit from the narrative; vengeful spirits exact their revenge (as far as they know) and move on, the now lingering spirit of William left behind with the other more confused, fractured, and animatronic-bound souls of his _other_ victims
It kind of ruins the aspect that william unintentionally brought it onto himself by taking apart the animatronics and "accidentally freeing" them- which is a great concept
The answer as to why the vengeful spirit is a child eventhough it's Michael could be simple for 2 reasons. 1: if he went through the nightmare experiments like they suggest in the video, if it's like the books he was stuck as a child in these experiments for years so mentally he might be trapped as a child. And 2: trauma, his life stopped the day he killed/injured his brother. Mentally not being able to move on and being constantly reminded by his father. Feeling small and weak because of the abuse of his father and then dying and possessing himself now living for vengeance... I don't think mentally he could mature and when looking in the mirror he saw his father, keeping him small. Real life example, kids that need to grow up really fast become adults but even as adults they feel like a little kid because mentally the maturing (to be able to survive) stopped at that age. In my opinion your soul will manifest in the way you see yourself, so that's why Michael being a child can be explained. In FNAF souls are also linked to emotion I believe, so it doesn't need to look like the physical body just like how you see yourself
I felt that it could have been an extra layer of torture for William. All of his murders were of children, I'm sure he felt children were beneath him so a child tormenting him would be worst. He seemed like an abusive narcissist so a young Michael, a mini version of him, the child he looked down on could also be worst and Mike would know that
My own personal little theory about Toy Chica is that her weird panties is that she used to have a skirt made of fabric! Dolls (or toys, I suppose) often have painted on underwear under their skirts or whatever, I like to think she was originally made like that but is all the fabric is gone after it gets worn out.
when you were talking about reasons why he would love two of his kids but not Micheal and how the Immortal and the Restless ties into Micheal it gave me an idea. I think William's dislike of Micheal goes beyond Cassidy's death. We know Micheal is the character watching Immortal and the Restless where a vampire in purple denies that a baby, who is very obviously a vampire, is his child. By the end Clara and Vlad reconcile but we see nothing of Vlad taking ownership of the child, nor do we see him care for or claim him. Since Micheal is the eldest perhaps he was conceived when they first started dating, or maybe they were dating other people, they do call Clara Vlad's mistress after all. So perhaps likewise William, despite the fact he and Micheal share an uncanny resemblance, never truly recognizes him as his son. That could also be why his bullying of Cassidy is so extreme, it goes beyond mere sibling rivalry. It also could explain why William treats him so disposably, because in his mind he's never truly believed that Micheal was his kid so who cares what happens to him. Also, it might be a possible explanation for the kid Micheal in Ultimate Custom Night and add more to his want for revenge. Since Micheal was a bully as a kid he has returned to that form to torment his father. That’s probably the only time his Dad gave him attention, because of negativity, whether bullying his brother or because of the bite. If my thoughts above are true he might blame William for his treatment of Cassidy, if only his dad would've treated him like his son, just like he treated his brother, none of this would have happened. Killing Micheal, albeit indirectly wasn’t William's only mistake, his first and greatest mistake was not treating Micheal like his true son when he was a child, because everything else was a consequence of that, and in UCN he is literally facing that consequence.
@@tswrangle1000 i think op is referring to how michael keeps william trapped (confined) in ucn, making his dialogue in sister location kind of a warning
@@tswrangle1000 oh i was trying to say ‘confined’, the past tense, would be grammatically incorrect, yeah confine works, but it sounds more like come find, with a d sound
I mean the original comment is correct in saying that sentence is grammatically incorrect, as the sentence the original commenter out down is grammatically incorrect, but the meaning comes across, which I believe was the point. If a cop said “I’m going to confined you” you would still know what they mean.
At 1:26:10, ALMA WADE from the F.E.A.R. Franchise. She was made pregnant twice before she was 12. Put into a chemically induced coma at 14, and finally is shot to death by her father at age 28. Throughout the trilogy, she keeps jumping between the twelve year old girl, and the twenty-eight year old woman. If you don't like that example, here's another. Andrew, from the dark pictures anthology game, "Little Hope." HE ACTUALLY IS THE BUSS DRIVER WHO IS IN HIS 40'S, BUT SPENDS THE WHOLE GAME Picturing himself as a high school/college kid. THAT GAME BY THE WAY, was all about mental trauma. Just like FNAF. There are more references, but I think you get it. 😊
Yeah there are definitely examples in other media, but I think they were asking about examples from the extended FNAF universe (FNAF books, games, graphic novels, etc.)
I think the reason why Michael has a younger voice in ultimate custom night is because remnant is the good memories and the only good memories he would have is before he bullied his younger brother AKA when he was very young
I honestly love their theory so much. However, the thing that I have the most trouble understanding is how Charlie apparently has so much control over her possession if the body being separated from the soul causes the level of confusion shown by Cassidy’s spirit. Charlie allegedly having such finesse moving through the afterlife she can be determined to help other spirits find peace just doesn’t fit perfectly with the notion of the bodies of the children needing to be present for stable possession. **Sorry to backtrack my comment, but I just thought of a reason/remembered something from their video that could explain this. I vaguely remember them touching on Charlie helping the kids find their body inside them as part of what gives them peace. If being aware of your body’s status and location is key for stabilizing the possession, then Puppet-Charlie would’ve immediately seen her body once the possession took place given how the puppet collapsed on top of her in that one FNAF6 minigame. Resulting in her immediately having greater control over her possession than the other animatronics who don’t know their bodies were stuffed inside them and even more so than Cassidy who’s body is stored in a separate location altogether.
25:00 I kinda figured BB is Funtime Foxy's little helper? Like... Circus Baby & Bidybabs, Ballora & Minireenas, Funtime Freddy and Bon-Bon + Bonnet, Funtime Foxy &... ??? Also, he steals batteries from your light or disables it somehow, which is useful for Funtime Foxy!
Jus woke up and thought of this. If how remnant works is that someone must die near metal to possess it. When CC gets bitten and in his coma. He flatlines. And everyone assumes, "oh, he just.. dies.. and flies on over and goes into golden freddy?" I don't like how that works. Dual Process Theory's explanation makes the most sound sense
17:06 you missed the explanation they gave about Susie in the books. They are still possessing the animatronics, but their spirits also wonder familiar places but get dragged back every night. Charlie makes them whole. Before her the suits were erratic. They’re possessor being split.
I felt that the child could be a young Michael. Elizabeth was blond so Mike could have been as well. That might be what he looked like when the boye happened. But I think it could be an extra layer of torture for William. All of his murders were of children, I'm sure he felt children were beneath and their lives inconsequential, so a child tormenting him would be an added layer psychologically. He was an abusive narcissist so a young Michael, a mini version of him, the child he looked down on could also be worst and Mike would know that.
Yeah, when I was young my hair was really blonde, it turned dark blonde/brown-ish over the years. Wouldn’t be that uncommon a thing to have happened to Michael if he started off blonde.
I like the idea that mike is the vengeful spirit, cuz then the scene with old man consequences is also saying "youve suffered enough. Rest now, because you dont belong here." Mike has been dealing with the consequences of his own actions his entire life.
I interpreted the child-like voice/visage in UCN might be Michael using Cassidy's voice/visage to taunt William, since, based on DPT's theory, William had some kind of "love" (real or not) for Cassidy. Salt in the wound kind of thing, maybe?
I subscribe to this theory *very* passionately. I LOVE the idea that it all leads up to a very powerful narrative conclusion of Michael being the Vengeful Spirit torturing Afton in hell. I really like that it all loops full circle. Connie and Cori are freakishly good theorists and story writers. I love the narrative they cooked up. Even if some things are controversial, likeee the Golden Freddy suit being what we're put into for night 4 of Sister Location. Actually, lemme go on a whole rant about that, I want to be known here. If you can disprove any of this, feel free! I actually do think it's not unplausible that Golden Freddy was the suit Michael was put in for SL night 4. We are *never* explicitly shown how animatronics with springlocks look like internally or function besides that one that we're put into, and it has faceplates that open. This makes it the *only* reference for how *ANY* springlock suit may operate. We know how the FNAF 1 animatronics work, they're endoskeletons underneath an outer shell, and they have one faceplate that mechanically raises up to reveal the inside of the mask. This is shown to us in the repair minigames in Help Wanted. We also know how the Funtimes work thanks to the Sister Location jumpscares and Funtime Freddy's repair. They are infinitely more complex internally, but they have four faceplates, two for the top half of the face, and two for the bottom. Given that Afton built that bunker and those animatronics, I'd like to say that the quad faceplates are his trademark. They are on literally nearly every animatronic down there, after all, even the Bidybabs. Since he was also the main owner of Fredbear's Family Diner (if we go by DPT's theory and just general speculation on my end), it's not unsafe to say that those animatronics may also have similar functionality. All this to say, who's to say that Fredbear and Spring Bonnie *don't* have sectioned faceplates that open for general maintenance? We can't even determine what animatronic it could be based on the shape of the faceplates, they have an accompanying outer shell over them on the Springlock series animatronics. The faceplates can clearly open with a person inside, springlocks engaged or otherwise. We can't actually prove or disprove it being GF/Fredbear, because we were never actually shown these suits in function. The closest we get is Afton helping an employee suit up inside of Fredbear with the full head intact, but that doesn't prove or disprove that they do or don't have sectioned faceplates. So, whether or not it *is* or *isn't* Golden Freddy is completely unsolvable at the moment. We have no frame of reference.
If you look closely at the way the faceplates of the FNAF 1 animatronics open, you can clearly see they don't have a split in the middle and the jaw stays in place while the rest of the plate opens. This directly contradicts the face shape of the SL animatronic which has a split that goes down the whole face with the mouth being in two parts, not one. If Golden Freddy's face had those splits in it, I'd be inclined to agree, but it just doesn't and neither does Spring Bonnie. On top of all of that, the suit we're in during night 4 doesn't have teeth. Golden Freddy very clearly does. And I'm fairly certain the only reference to who built the Fredbear and Spring Bonnie mechanisms is when they are credited to Henry, not William. You can say there's no way to know, but you do have to scoot around the evidence against it to do so.
@@ShesNervous You don't really have to scoot around it? You can quite easily argue for or against either side of the coin. (I'm not trying to be difficult, I love the debate.) 1. The FNAF 1 animatronics are *different* than the SL ones. Using the SL animatronics' faceplates as a reference to the FNAF 1 animatronics is moot, the FNAF 1 animatronics don't have quad-faceplates to begin with (and I noted this! they have one faceplate, the one that raises). As for Golden Freddy, he is *NOT* a FNAF 1/Freddy Fazbear's Pizza animatronic *OR* a Sister Location animatronic. He is a Fredbear's Family Diner animatronic, and a collaboration between William and Henry at that. Those animatronics from FFD are for a fact built differently to both FNAF 1 animatronics and SL animatronics (neither of those generation animatronics feature springlocks), though we have never seen SB or GF open any faceplates. We don't even actually *know* if Fredbear or Spring Bonnie have them. All we do have is that springlock suit we're locked into, which tells us that at least one springlock suit- whether Fredbear, Spring Bonnie, or some other suit- *does* have faceplates. So we have some evidence that they do, and that those faceplates are quad-faceplates. 2. The teeth argument is good! Though we do know based on the animatronics in the backroom of presumably FFD (from the after-night minigames in FNAF 4 where CC gets locked into it) that the suit heads of the animatronics can be removed to show only their endoskeleton. We can't reasonably say that it wasn't removed. This is a great point anyway for me, as I feel like it'd be weird narratively for the outer shell to be removed for "insert random reason here" or "scott didn't think about that." It could be explained away (dead kids put Michael in suit, had to remove head to figure out how to do that), but it's not strong enough. 3. Henry and William both built the animatronics. Sorry for that, I wasn't trying to exclude Henry from the building process. They had to have collaborated, otherwise William wouldn't be able to build them on his own to such polish, in secret, sans-Henry, with even more complicated mechanisms and operations. Though Henry probably (I have no frame of reference for this, my knowledge about Henry is drier than the Sahara) designed and built the springlocks. Tbh there's genuinely a lack of evidence confirming that it is Golden Freddy, as well as a lack of evidence denying that it is Golden Freddy. That suit is up in the air. There *is* just no way to know from inside of the random springlock suit. It could be any springlock suit, but we only know of two. We don't even know that it can't be Spring Bonnie. Baby's line about it not being used "the way it was supposed to" could hint to that. She'd have to know about it, though. She might, if she's working with the other dead kids. Who knows? The only thing that we have to go on with that timeline is that William ends up in a certain Spring Bonnie that was sitting in a backroom at some random time before, during, or after SL, but before the events of FNAF 3. He could've moved it to that bunker from SL later. But we also have no full evidence that he did or didn't return to his bunker after SL, either. Anything could've happened, the narrative hasn't told us. The time between SL and FNAF 3 is massive. :(
59:53 I actually really like this because there is this one scene in the sister location trailer of all the animatronic like up close and when it gets to Funtime foxy you can see a reflection in his cheek that looks like the puppet. The others have parts of them reflected, like circus baby’s microphone. But foxy has a reflection of what seems to be the puppet (I recommend you check this out because I remember someone mentioning this but I’m not sure if I remember it correctly).
@@ShesNervous mhm, knowing that the puppet would be the only fully possessed animatronic and pretty powerful, i would think that william wouldnt melt down her remnent and instead experiment on possession.
Not in the Fnaf universe, but that exact thing you’re asking for of the spirit reverting to their younger self on death is seen in the final episode of demon slayer’s entertainment district arc, where the upper moon 3 demon’s spirits are conversing as or after they die, the sister specifically doing this
i think a lot of people have made their points about how it makes sense for Michael to revert into a child form, and i agree. i just want to add to the discussion that abuse generates an emotional growth stunt, specially if it is suffered at a very young age. we indeed don't know the behaviour of Willshitiam before CC/Cassidy and Elizabeth appearances, but it is very likely Michael suffered neglect and other forms of child abuse from a very young age, being the only child and then becoming the "failure" after, you know, everything. there's also the fact that, into his adulthood, we know he was at the service of William, obeying and not questioning the things he was esposed to out of being terrified of the monster his father is, but also expecting his love and the guilt from kickstarting his brother's death. this is very similar to a possible infantilisation perceived by Michael, since he has had to fend for himself, probably since his late teens or earlier, so the process of growth we consider as normal is one very twisted in his context. so yeah, viewing it also from the point of analysis that this is Michael's spirit, not his body and decaying one, it makes more sense for it to reflect, not the state of his body at the moment of his (second??) death, but his actual state of mind.
I hear everyone. I'm not even sure where I implied the issue was that it doesn't psychologically track? DPT explains it very well in the video. None of you reiterating this addresses that this has never occurred in this franchise before or after nor does it address why Adult Michael has a British accent and the Vengeful Spirit notably does not. I mean no harm, but I just disagree with the argument.
@@ShesNervous truetrue. that would've been replicated in other instances, even in the books, where it would actually make sense and they have the opportunity to do it. i mean, i never really thought you even implied or denied all we're talking about here MFMSMS. it's just interesting to build the discussion around the character development without using the repetitive themes of fnaf as a base, which, in itself, is really odd when trying to build a solid storyline, but i guess works¿ idk
Immortal and the restless represents the parallels between Mike and William, both are ‘vampires’, living off of remanent for decades, immortal can technically be multiple in certain old English contexts as well
THE MAMAS KUDOS FOR SAYING THAT FOR SPILLING WOOOOOOO I LOVE WHEN MY FAVOURITE INTERESTS OVERLAP!! LOVE YOU EVEN MORE NOW (still in the middle of the video lol, i agree with basically like all of ur takes)
1. love the fandom name "nervous system" 10/10 2. im so glad you changed what you changed, i couldn't stop thinking abt it as i watched the first video lol
I'd like to imagine that when Charlie was alive the music box was something special to her. Something that could sooothe her in life or death. And William would probably know something like this since him and Henry's families were somewhat close.
The beauty of the nightmare gas (screwy as it is), is it can explain how fnaf 4 can be Michael, not CC, and also explain the stomach hatches. Because Michael could have merged together both CC and Elizabeth’s deaths, either during the experiments or after the fact if he continued to have nightmares (because going through that could easily give him PTSD fueled nightmares)
I think the reason the vengeful spirit looks and sounds like a child is because that is how Michael decided to present himself to William. so, hear me out......... logically the vengeful spirit (Michael) has at least some control over what William sees and hears... so what better way to present himself to him than a little child? Michael wants William to see and hear that the cause of his hell is, a child. "a child" William's main victims, a defenseless "child" the fact that "a child" is the one who is torturing him is, for Michael, the perfect revenge against William's enormous ego. At the same time, it is revealed to us (the players) and to William that this child is Michael, the one whom William willingly and knowingly sent to his death. This type of revelation is VERY often used in storytelling... very, very often used. One in which a character is trapped and his captor or the person behind his imprisonment at first is not physically seen as someone the character recognizes, but it is through dialogue (I've been looking for you, you KNEW I would catch you at some point, let me PUT YOU BACK TOGTHER....etc.) and visually (the nightmare animatronics ) clues to things that only the character and his captor would know. It doesn't seem at all illogical to me to think that Scott chose that kind of storyteling to tell this part of the story.
Actually I did think of a reason for Michael reverting to a child when he died, although it’s kinda a loose connection it could make sense. We know Scott is a Christian and in the Bible it says that people in a sense sort of revert to a perfect or specific version of themselves. So if Michael is meant to be the “big good” so to speak, that could be sort of a play on that idea? He could have reverted back to a stage in life where his father being a psycho wasn’t quite clear yet, before crying child died or perhaps was even born. A state where everything was still good and perfect, before everything went wrong. Which would be the “perfect” version of himself. It’s a really loose connection but it was a thought I had.
What if afton used recordings of crying child for balloon boy’s voice and that’s why in FNAF 3 he follows the sound? Not because he hears just any kid call for him but because he hears HIS kid call for him.
Okay, regarding to your question at the end - was there ever an instance of someone dying but then their soul appears to be younger, let me introduce you to the very last episode of the TV show supernatural (SPOILERS AHEAD IF YOU PLAN TO WATCH) In the very last episode, Dean dies on a hunt, while his younger brother Sam continues living. He ultimately dies of old age, and meets with Dean, in heaven, on a bridge where the story began. Now, one thing that was interesting is that Sam appeared to be *the same age as he was when Dean died*. He didn't have his dumb mop gray hair, he didn't have troubles walking, he was Sam, around 40-45 years old, that greeted Dean on that bridge. It's heavily implied that Sam's soul *died with Dean*, as the brothers have been through everything together, and had died multiple times protecting each other. Family was a big theme of the show, and it made sense for Sam's soul to die alongside Dean, maybe not completely, as Sam went on to have a life, but a big piece of it for sure, especially because they were finally set free of the big bad they've fought, basically their entire lives. Yes, Sam did have a life after Dean died. But none of it was as enjoying, because he missed his big brother. Same thing could be said for Michael. He might have not been completely responsible for Cassidy's death, but he initiated it, he stuffed the kid in the jaws of Fredbear. The injury he brought upon Cassidy was what set William off to stuff Cassidy in the suit, and inevitably kill him. He didn't intend for the prank to go as far. As Dual Process mentioned, it's quite possible that he didn't really hate Cassidy, but was rather angry because he had an absent father and hell, maybe he was bullying the kid to get attention from William, even if it was scolding. It makes sense for Michael to revert in age - William should see the kid he broke all those years ago, when he chose his creations over and over again, instead of his own kids.
I just found your channel a few days ago from Rye Toast and your videos are sooooo good. We really are in peak FNAF with the amount of people making theories.
my interpretation of michael looking younger as a spirit is referring back to michael being the kid in fnaf 4, this is where he was experimented on, where he lost himself and where a lot of his trauma comes from. he's still just a kid punishing the person that he couldn't stand up to when he was younger almost like DID (dissociative identity disorder) or MPD (multiple personality disorder). this could even explain why sometimes michael always obeys william and other times will directly go against orders, i.e. messing with the animatronics, going to the gravesite, not taking care of his siblings when told. he definitely has enough trauma to cause DID or MPD, and could explain why he shows up as a kid, this is the version of himself that's protected him all these years who's taken all the punishment and torture and can now finally fight back. this is the version, face and voice of the one he shouldn't have killed, the kid the william neglected and the childhood he destroyed.
10:43 ok idk shit about fnaf lore this is a recent hyperfixation for me but i feel like it doesnt make sense for the cc to have seen elizabeth die anyways because wasnt circus baby programmed to grab a child when the child is alone? if cc saw elizabeth then, elizabeth wouldn't be alone so why would baby even activate? also for michael being represented as a kid, that reminds me of age regression due to trauma. idk about the meaning of the depiction in the series itself tho
A very intriguing and compelling Theory, I wonder what they cover next. Also, fair and valid points and opinions, I guess we’ll see how this affects things.
I'm not really much of a theorist, but, I do have one theory. Though 80% of it is working off of stuff other people thought of, the rest just me putting the pieces together. Okay, so, I'll start this with a question... Why do you think so many of the animatronics in Pizza sim act so.. different? Baby goes from wanting to scup her dad, to becoming a daddy's girl, and Lefte is... Well, why would Charlie even want to kill us to begin with? And shouldn't Henry have designed and programmed Lefte to NOT kill people? Molten Freddy is also just... weird. In different ways depending on how they're interpreted. Like, even if they're just killing because they're programmed to because 'funtimes' ...they're not the ones who kill. They're the distractions- Circus Baby is the one who kills. And yet... They kill now. Regardless, 2 or 3 out of 4 of the animatronics act weird, or differently in FNAF 6, than they normally would. My theory is on WHY. William Afton, is controlling the animatronics around him. There's precedent for this in the books and the movie. The entire plot of them involves him controlling the spirits haunting the animatronics... Why wouldn't he be doing the same here? Why couldn't he control his daughter to be a Daddy's girl, and Lefte and Molten Freddy into being able to kill Micheal
I believe Baby's shift is a result of gaining additional remnant/agony from Mike, tbh. She eventually realizes that whoever was down there wasn't her dad, so it's possible she then believes that the horrible things her dad did to her were done by who she killed... Mike. A lot of people change their ideas of the absent parent with additional context, even turning on their custodial parent. With that in mind, Baby has the perfect excuse to be manipulated into siding with William, by pinning all the blame on Mike. The narrative is so easy, too. "Your older brother, who bullied & killed the Crying Child, grows up & gets fired for "tampering with the animatronics", and objectively *did* work for William, so he could be blamed for *also* messing up Baby, who goes on to kill William's daughter. He hated this family." Etc., etc. As for Lefty, while Henry made a lot of animatronics, my bet is that he made them on a budget, probably using parts, and remnant/agony laden parts from William's past parts & animatronics, which works for him anyway, because he wants *everything* sorted shut. Charlie has also said that she wants the UCN player, which this theory assumes to be Mike, "out of her way". We've known she's not against killing since we met her. The Funtimes all kill. They're scrambled spirits, unlike Baby. If they're haunted, they aren't working properly. They likely never were to begin with because of all the remnant mixing, and I personally suspect they weren't finished. Afton wasn't "controlling" the spirits in the movie, he lead them by tricking them into thinking he was their friend. They were acting of their own free will, which is why they turn on him in the climax.
In regards to ghosts not aging; Michael technically died as warly as SL, from then on he simply possessed himself? And/or; Its Young Michael (mental state) not having to devolve as far back
I like some of the conclusions but I don't know how well some of the logic stands up (the deference to different sources of canon sometimes varies a little too wildly for me, and I think they go a little too far in pushing for the Cassidy is Crying Child even though I agree with the theory in concept). I'm looking forward to seeing how they develop as theorists and where they go from here, once they fine tune their channel's voice.
EDIT: so I was at work for a. 12 hr shift. ( Thanks for the long form content SAN.. ) I went back and rewatched the 83 bite mini scene, and I was wrong there is no alligator bro I was thinking of Freddy mask. But alligator mask is still present on the backgrounds. So it could still be a Henry centered character. original : F.... What if and hewr me out.... Aligstor mask bro during the bite of 93 is... Not a bro... Its vanessa . And vanessa is Henrys Older daughter...
Dual Process, Rye Toast, MatPat... does IDs Fantasy, Fuhnaff, and John of Game Theory have cats? I know there are more, but those are the ones off the top of my hea- Hyperdroid!
from my understanding of ghosts and spirits. they can portray themselves how they would like. now in FNAF we haven’t seen anybody do this. however, ghosts don’t have to portray themselves as how they die.
Random theory: Michael Afton is adopted but William is his biological father from an illegitimate relationship with Henry's wife It COULD but doesn't necessarily connect back to Silver Eyes. Perhaps Vanessa is Michael's twin. This is highly speculative, but I think it would make some sense. William doesn't accept Michael as his son. Even possibly attempts to brainwash him to be similar to the crying child.
I do not agree with the idea that Michael is TOYSNHK, however, for those looking for an explanation of why he uses a kid voice that could be one of two things: 1. Thats not Michael doing that but that is how William views and thinks of michael (he's always this little kid of his who can never quite do what hes told). Or 2. This is michael purposely being the little kid as an added level of torture to william as he knows william only ever thinks of him as a child thats incapable of doing what hes told and to add insult to injury michael makes it so William is surrounded by his creations, nightmares, actions, and the people he looked down on and constantly manipulated. Maybe it boils williams blood more hearing the child voice of michael and being totally powerless in the situation etc...
A thought I just had was, and idk if it matters, but when were the bodies removed from the original animatronics? If part of William’s motivation for being active during FNAF2 was because they were going to reuse the animatronics with bodies inside.
i honestly like the idea of cassidy being cassie. It helps fill my personal gap with stitchlinegames. I felt like the theory made cassidy a throw away character and irrlevant to the lore. But saying cassidy is cassie and still important helps out alot.
about the suit in SL night 4 could it possibly the security puppet in FNAF 6? the facial shape would match up perfectly and has a funtime facial pattern that opens up
In regards to the Monsters Inc comparison at 7:15 , if agony is the energy that the monsters gain from children’s screams, would that make when they switch to using laughter at the end of the movie them harvesting remnant since remnant is supposedly based upon positive memories?
I always thought that the game crashing with omc was an end to the game and the soul finding peace I think if VS is Michael that could be the explanation as to where he is in the mimic era
I really really think Baby stayed in Michael cause how else would his eyes still work...The others escaping to the sewer once they voted her out may show that Baby was always in control of moving the endoskeletons
It isn't clear how the functional a body needs to be for possession to work. As a zombie, his eyes might just work because they are still eye-shaped and his possession makes his ghost eyes real enough to see.
I don’t think “dream theory” was ever real. In the dawko interview when Scott is explaining how he wanted each game to give a different experience he said that while he was making Fnaf 3 he had already planned Fnaf 4 and Fnaf 5. Fnaf 5 being Sister Location. If he already had SL planned before Fnaf 3 was even out then it can’t be a pivot away from Dream Theory. Also in the build up to UCN when Scott was revealing the characters that would be in the game he made fun of several fan theories that were popular at one point or another but were never real like “Good Guy Foxy” and “Phone Guy Is Purple Guy”. And along side those he made fun of Dream Theory too. He lumped the mocking of Dream Theory along side 2 other theories that were never true. So Scott sees Dream Theory on the same level as good guy Foxy and Phone Guy is Purple Guy.
Scott didn't have the story planned out he said so himself in the interview and in fact that segment where he talks about thinking of fnaf 4-5 during fnaf 3 isn't to do with lore its to do with colour palettes and approaches to setting. No concrete ideas or anything he even says that he never had the story planned out. Dream theory being joked about by Scott isn't evidence that it was never canon, it can be easily explained Scott acknowledging a poor writing decision he almost stuck with and is joking about it, that doesn't inherently mean he views it the same as those other theories.
@@johnman8398 but the fact he was planing a game after Fnaf 4 shows that Fnaf 4 was never the end, for Dream Theory to ever be true Fnaf 4 would have to be the end because once it’s revealed that all of the games aren’t real and are just the hallucinations of a kid in a coma (which makes absolutely no since given basic information from the games) there’s no more story: There’s no murderer, there’s no haunted animatronics, there’s no mysteries. It’s just the real world.
@@jk844100 He only made plans for another game after he saw the reception the game got and changed course but originally that was meant to be the end. It all being the dreams of a kid in a coma does make sense (anything that doesn't make sense can be straight up be answered by saying its a dream). Also Dream theory doesn't inherently mean there's no murder, animatronics or mystery all it means are that the events depicted in the games so far never happened but perhaps something similar happened in reality.
@@johnman8398 “he only made plans for another game after he saw the reception the game got and changed course” But he said had plans for a Fnaf 5 before 3 was even out. You even agreed to that. Why would a kid from 1983 dream about being a security guard in 1987, 1992, and 2015 with a pay slip that also has correct inflation values for the time?
There is irl cases of when people get their childhoods snatched away when they get older they become more childish talke George Washington’s mother as a example she was married at a young aged forced to raise like six kids and her husband died so she raised them all on her own there are cases of her claiming George doesn’t take care of her and stuff like that when he does but all this to say Mike may have reverted back to a child like state because his childhood was snatched away by either the bite or the nightmare gas
Yeah, the only part I am not 100% convinced in this theory is Michael being the Vengeful Spirit. CCassidy makes more sense, HOWEVER Michael is more satisfying.
I think I'm going to do a theory soon including the evidence I feel like they missed or didn't include since it was irrelevant to their point. I think a very strong case can be made for CC that doesn't negate Mike's arc.
Personally i think the whole Michael being reverted to a kid wasn't what happened I think more that Michael was using an image of his face as a kid as a taunt instead. Just my 3 cents
Abuisve perspective Elizebeth is the Golden Child Mike possibly the scape gout CC / Cassidy just there he’s not as bad as Mike but Liz is still the best of all (maybe because she is a girl you know sexism mixed with favortive tisum) Edit: Mike is the wosrt because he is the oldest the first failer. With the age gap maybe a mistake child Cassidy was another male another fail if he wanted a girl but maybe this time planned. He doesn’t care about Cassidy but he doesn’t hate him as much, that why his lines are so bland threw fedbear and that might also be linked to the more feminine assisted name Elizebeth was the girl he finally wanted the one he loves over the others. He cares about Cassidy but he isn’t as important Maybe having him be brought back was because Lizzy was upset with her brother missing, so she could have a sibling a friend even if William want to found of him
If I had to give a criticism to your video it’s that you force a narrative too much. Where instead of understanding where there coming from at times you look back to your own theories and base it from there.
I legit missed the talkback stream by about half a minute, so I'll just comment here. William didn't kill Michael. In fact, Michael says exactly the opposite: "I should be dead, but I'm not." That line confirms that Michael was alive the whole time, or he's dead & he's not aware of that, debunking the "he intentionally possessed himself" interpretation. Also, the logic the video presents for why Michael blames William for his death is... confusing to me. Michael is just talking about how he went down there & freed his sister, as William asked. I don't see the connection they're making there.
William knew they would attack his son Michael, as he looks close enough like him to these possessed funtime animatronics. He has been abusive to Mike already in the past, so it seemed like a realistic trade he'd attempt with his own son. When Michael finally understands the situation, he's kinda angry that his father would do that to him. To willfully send him on a suicide mission, that is how Will attempted to get rid of Mike. But something went wrong and he isn't fully done in by Ennard. If you listen closely he doesn't sound exactly normal, like the vocal chords are mechanically resonating as an animatronic would. He should be dead, but he is something else. I wouldn't call that living either.
@@thymii Saying William knew they would attack Michael is speculative at best. And again, even if it is true, how would Michael know that? Nothing in his monologue suggests that he does. He sounds sad more than anything. And yeah, Michael sounds robotic, but he's still alive regardless. It doesn't matter what state he's in.
@@UnoriginalJokester Yes this is speculation, glad you caught up. We're reading between the lines of obscure statements. Nothing will be handed to us so easily.
My interpretation of the "I should be dead but I'm not" line has always been that Michael is saying: "I should be dead" ie 'I shouldn't be in this world still. I shouldn't be able to think, move, actually, talk, etc still.' that to him being truly dead entails having moved on/not existing anymore, yet he still is. He's 'not dead' in the sense that he can still walk, talk, act - not that it's proof he isn't a spirit possessing his own body. If you think about what we know happened to Michael logically, then he can't be surviving without being a spirit possessing his dead body (whether or not he realises that's what's happening). The only way Ennard is going to fit inside Michael's body is if there's extra room in there - the scooper literally removed at least some of Michael's flesh & organs to allow Ennard to hide in him. The mirror scene shows Michael's silhouette with definitely robotic eyes, which to me says he literally doesn't have his eyes anymore (though tbf that then begs the question of how Michael goes undetected after Ennard leaves - no eyes, probably a large hole in his chest, his skin decaying and going purple) and if Ennard is managing to get robotic eyes up in Michael's eye sockets, doesn't that suggest he may not even have a brain anymore to fit Ennard's head up there? Same with how Ennard controlled the movement of Michael's limbs - suggests to me that muscle or bone got removed for Ennard to fit, so Micheal is literally almost entirely just a skin suit that Ennard can wear as a disguise. There's no surviving that. Michael has to be a spirit possessing himself. After Ennard leaves his body he even collapses to the ground (don't forget that through these scenes his body has been literally turning purple too - he's decaying & the neighbours can see it) and then white pinpricks of light appear in his eyes (that suggests supernatural to me) before he rises to his feet in a way that screams 'ghost possessing something' to me, since he doesn't get to his knees, then push himself up with his hands like a normal person who's getting up from the floor would. So overall, I don't think there's any way to argue Michael didn't die in SL. He's definitely his spirit possessing his dead body. The question instead is whether he understands that that's what happened. (Though personally with the state his body is in, the fact he says he's been having to live in the shadows, and how much he's interacted with possessed animatronics in the past, I can't see him not knowing it's possible for spirits to live on - though it'd probably be a shock that he can possess his body & it doesn't just have to happen with an animatronic, which is maybe why he seems confused and says "I should be dead" - and understanding that that's most likely what's happening to him)
Then.. scroll past the video?? If you don't care why are you watching a video on it? More specifically someone TALKING about a video on the lore? Someone who doesn't care just scrolls past.
I've seen a lot of people say stuff to this effect and I really do like it. I don't know if I believe it but I will keep it in my "file" so to speak because it is compelling.
Also it’s interesting that the Ultimate Custom Night Golden Freddy scene is proceeded by text saying “You did it!” It could be literally interpreted as Michael telling William “YOU did this” and showing him springlocking his own son
I’ve been thinking the same thing, when I realized it, my heart skipped a beat, it’s just AAAAAAAH SO SATISFYING AS A NARRATIVE STRATEGY AAAAAAAAAA
I think it makes sense for Michael to revert to a more childlike voice because he's speaking to his father. It's not just a son speaking to his father, but a son who has been abused by his father. Michael may be getting his revenge against William in UCN, but William has always been the adult in Michael's psyche with Michael always being subservient to William because of the abuse. Bereft of his body by the fires and left with nothing but an angry, enraged soul driven strongly by emotions, it makes sense thematically for Michael to present himself as a kid. This is not the story of two adults battling it out, it's a story of revenge of a son against his father.
Now storytelling wise, I think the answer is much simpler. Having an adult male voice actor for the vengeful spirit would have immediately given away the mystery. We know what Henry, William and Michael sound like, they've all had spoken lines in the games, so if they just went and used Michael's VA then everyone immediately knows what is going on, there is no mystery.
And besides, Duel Theory Reaction makes a good point, we know who could possibly be the Vengeful Spirit because of who is in the building at the end of fnaf 6, no one else on the list makes anywhere near as much sense as it being Michael.
Such a great comment 💯💯💯
And usually, when emotional outbursts occur, a person regresses to a previous more childlike emotional state
hey, anti-starlo, not to be that guy, but...wrong 'dual'.
I think the only issue beyond that is that the voice isn't British. Michael has a clear British accent in his adulthood.
But I think I can take a stab at an explanation. We see that Michael has a group of friends in '83, given that he's living in Utah, that means that he's had time to start acclimating to the accent of his peers. Then, after '83, being isolated with his father would have him start developing a similar accent as he wouldn't have much opportunity to talk with anyone else, at least going by the process of events Dual presented
@@wyawardclown then don't be that guy lmao
The shookeneth is real. As I was listening to this theory unfold, the thought came to mind "this sounds so cool, it'd be awesome if it was a show or a game or something." XD
The reason I think Micheal would "revert" to a child after death, it's because he was never allowed to grow up. Not mentally, at least. He was probably neglected to the point of bullying his younger sibling for attention, and after that trauma, the younger sibling "went missing" (he probably didn't yet know William killed him). After that, his curiosity for the forest and what happened to Cassidy, was punished with torture.
That brain was not allowed to become the one of a "fully socially acceptable grown-up".
So, when he shows up to his father, he shows himself as a child. The child, that is not only the one he shouldn't have killed, but the one he abused and didn't allow to grow.
"You did this to me. I was so young, and your doing is now back to hunt you."
Micheal has always been my absolute favorite character in fnaf, and their theory made my heart soar and shiver! I don't know if I explained it well? I hope it's understandable!
the connection between William screaming "Henry" and "Mike" because he's screaming to the only two people who are there, That part made my jaw drop.
I think William blames Michael for the deaths of both Cassidy AND Elizabeth because of obviously what he did to Cassidy, but also he was supposed to be the one watching Elizabeth and making sure she didn't go near the animatronics alone. But Elizabeth gave him the slip. That to me would explain his hatred of Michael but his love for his other two kids- Michael killed his siblings in William's eyes.
I also think maybe Michael is deliberately, as a ghost, pretending to be a child because his father preferred to kill children. He wasn't going around killing just anyone to use in his experiments when statistically, he'd be more likely to fly under the radar using homeless people or sex workers, because the police generally dgaf about them. He was using children- innocent, trusting souls that William could easily overpower. As a ghost with no body he also has no vocal chords nor appearance, so he can pretend to be a child. That's my interpretation.
It really makes William out as a coward, going after smaller victims who would not have been able to overpower him, where as an adult, even in a more disheveled state, would easily be able to get away.
I think him turning into a kids is to mess with William since all confirmed kill were children and the irony.
I like that interpretation.
It also seems to be a younger version of Michael, younger than what we see in the Bite of ‘83 scene.
Perhaps this is the form Michael takes to show William he’s no longer a victim of abuse.
There had to be a reason Michael would bully his younger brother, Cassidy. Perhaps William babied Cassidy and gave him more attention.
I mean, if he IS the crying child, then it looks like Cassidy cries a lot, or always looks like on the verse of tears. Abuse isn’t ALWAYS intentional. Neglect can be argued as a form of mental abuse.
Perhaps he takes a form younger than anything we’ve seen because he doesn’t want to appear as a victim, he wants to appear as he did the last time he wasn’t abused by his father.
Perhaps it’s to show William, “You have no hold over me anymore, Father.”
I have a theory on why the music box works for the puppet which makes William a bigger scumbag than he already is:
Since William and Henry were friends before even maybe close he had to know Charlie and maybe witnessed Henry singing a specific melody to Charlie to calm her down or to sing her to sleep or alternatively Henry did the same thing but with a music box so he either found one that was similar to that melody or just bought the same one outright which would make sense as an effective distraction to Charlie as she would be attracted to something her Father used to do or use(And hey maybe this is how he figured She was Charlie after remembering that it was the puppet who discovered her body and this was his way of confirming it)
41:57 i think i commented this on the original theory vid too, but i think the simplest explanation is that the ghost children that attacked William here are most likely the kids from the _DCI_ not the MCI. They don't appear to be bound to any particular animatronics, at most they may be bound to the _building_ , and it kinda gives them a clean exit from the narrative; vengeful spirits exact their revenge (as far as they know) and move on, the now lingering spirit of William left behind with the other more confused, fractured, and animatronic-bound souls of his _other_ victims
That's actually pretty solid. A second set of victims bothers me ever so slightly, but not enough to discount this possibility.
@@ShesNervous Agreed. I feel the same exact way
It kind of ruins the aspect that william unintentionally brought it onto himself by taking apart the animatronics and "accidentally freeing" them- which is a great concept
Matpat is also reacting to this so yey
The answer as to why the vengeful spirit is a child eventhough it's Michael could be simple for 2 reasons. 1: if he went through the nightmare experiments like they suggest in the video, if it's like the books he was stuck as a child in these experiments for years so mentally he might be trapped as a child. And 2: trauma, his life stopped the day he killed/injured his brother. Mentally not being able to move on and being constantly reminded by his father. Feeling small and weak because of the abuse of his father and then dying and possessing himself now living for vengeance... I don't think mentally he could mature and when looking in the mirror he saw his father, keeping him small.
Real life example, kids that need to grow up really fast become adults but even as adults they feel like a little kid because mentally the maturing (to be able to survive) stopped at that age.
In my opinion your soul will manifest in the way you see yourself, so that's why Michael being a child can be explained. In FNAF souls are also linked to emotion I believe, so it doesn't need to look like the physical body just like how you see yourself
I felt that it could have been an extra layer of torture for William. All of his murders were of children, I'm sure he felt children were beneath him so a child tormenting him would be worst. He seemed like an abusive narcissist so a young Michael, a mini version of him, the child he looked down on could also be worst and Mike would know that
Someone spoiled her. We must punish that someone.😢
nooooo it is okay!
@@ShesNervous I was kidding 😂
Ohhhh dude I saw that original comment, I don't remember the name though
I sentence that person to infinite pizzas (paid for by the sender, no debt).
@@ShesNervous its me my bad💀
My own personal little theory about Toy Chica is that her weird panties is that she used to have a skirt made of fabric! Dolls (or toys, I suppose) often have painted on underwear under their skirts or whatever, I like to think she was originally made like that but is all the fabric is gone after it gets worn out.
when you were talking about reasons why he would love two of his kids but not Micheal and how the Immortal and the Restless ties into Micheal it gave me an idea. I think William's dislike of Micheal goes beyond Cassidy's death. We know Micheal is the character watching Immortal and the Restless where a vampire in purple denies that a baby, who is very obviously a vampire, is his child. By the end Clara and Vlad reconcile but we see nothing of Vlad taking ownership of the child, nor do we see him care for or claim him. Since Micheal is the eldest perhaps he was conceived when they first started dating, or maybe they were dating other people, they do call Clara Vlad's mistress after all. So perhaps likewise William, despite the fact he and Micheal share an uncanny resemblance, never truly recognizes him as his son. That could also be why his bullying of Cassidy is so extreme, it goes beyond mere sibling rivalry. It also could explain why William treats him so disposably, because in his mind he's never truly believed that Micheal was his kid so who cares what happens to him.
Also, it might be a possible explanation for the kid Micheal in Ultimate Custom Night and add more to his want for revenge. Since Micheal was a bully as a kid he has returned to that form to torment his father. That’s probably the only time his Dad gave him attention, because of negativity, whether bullying his brother or because of the bite. If my thoughts above are true he might blame William for his treatment of Cassidy, if only his dad would've treated him like his son, just like he treated his brother, none of this would have happened. Killing Micheal, albeit indirectly wasn’t William's only mistake, his first and greatest mistake was not treating Micheal like his true son when he was a child, because everything else was a consequence of that, and in UCN he is literally facing that consequence.
I been thinking there was an affair personally 👀 but I don't have any evidence it's all vibes
Now that they made me realise Mike is the vengeful spirit:
""I'm going to come find you" slowed down sounds like: "I'm going to confind you"
The word you’re looking for is confine. That would be grammatically incorrect. I dont think this is a hint.
@@regulargoat7259"I'm going to confine you" is a grammatically correct sentence, though I can't see what he's cooking
@@tswrangle1000 i think op is referring to how michael keeps william trapped (confined) in ucn, making his dialogue in sister location kind of a warning
@@tswrangle1000 oh i was trying to say ‘confined’, the past tense, would be grammatically incorrect, yeah confine works, but it sounds more like come find, with a d sound
I mean the original comment is correct in saying that sentence is grammatically incorrect, as the sentence the original commenter out down is grammatically incorrect, but the meaning comes across, which I believe was the point. If a cop said “I’m going to confined you” you would still know what they mean.
At 1:26:10, ALMA WADE from the F.E.A.R. Franchise. She was made pregnant twice before she was 12. Put into a chemically induced coma at 14, and finally is shot to death by her father at age 28. Throughout the trilogy, she keeps jumping between the twelve year old girl, and the twenty-eight year old woman. If you don't like that example, here's another. Andrew, from the dark pictures anthology game, "Little Hope." HE ACTUALLY IS THE BUSS DRIVER WHO IS IN HIS 40'S, BUT SPENDS THE WHOLE GAME Picturing himself as a high school/college kid. THAT GAME BY THE WAY, was all about mental trauma. Just like FNAF. There are more references, but I think you get it. 😊
Yeah there are definitely examples in other media, but I think they were asking about examples from the extended FNAF universe (FNAF books, games, graphic novels, etc.)
@@renevarrYeah specifically in FNAF
I have been enjoying reading these comments though just because it's cool to hear the stories.
I think the reason why Michael has a younger voice in ultimate custom night is because remnant is the good memories and the only good memories he would have is before he bullied his younger brother AKA when he was very young
Im so ready to see the shock on your face.
Edit:
If yall missed the premiere, you missed 1 hell of a time I'll leave it at that
I honestly love their theory so much. However, the thing that I have the most trouble understanding is how Charlie apparently has so much control over her possession if the body being separated from the soul causes the level of confusion shown by Cassidy’s spirit. Charlie allegedly having such finesse moving through the afterlife she can be determined to help other spirits find peace just doesn’t fit perfectly with the notion of the bodies of the children needing to be present for stable possession.
**Sorry to backtrack my comment, but I just thought of a reason/remembered something from their video that could explain this. I vaguely remember them touching on Charlie helping the kids find their body inside them as part of what gives them peace. If being aware of your body’s status and location is key for stabilizing the possession, then Puppet-Charlie would’ve immediately seen her body once the possession took place given how the puppet collapsed on top of her in that one FNAF6 minigame. Resulting in her immediately having greater control over her possession than the other animatronics who don’t know their bodies were stuffed inside them and even more so than Cassidy who’s body is stored in a separate location altogether.
25:00 I kinda figured BB is Funtime Foxy's little helper?
Like... Circus Baby & Bidybabs,
Ballora & Minireenas,
Funtime Freddy and Bon-Bon + Bonnet, Funtime Foxy &... ???
Also, he steals batteries from your light or disables it somehow, which is useful for Funtime Foxy!
Dual process theory sent us this way with their community post :) I think this was a fun reaction
Jus woke up and thought of this. If how remnant works is that someone must die near metal to possess it. When CC gets bitten and in his coma. He flatlines. And everyone assumes, "oh, he just.. dies.. and flies on over and goes into golden freddy?" I don't like how that works. Dual Process Theory's explanation makes the most sound sense
17:06 you missed the explanation they gave about Susie in the books. They are still possessing the animatronics, but their spirits also wonder familiar places but get dragged back every night. Charlie makes them whole. Before her the suits were erratic. They’re possessor being split.
I felt that the child could be a young Michael. Elizabeth was blond so Mike could have been as well. That might be what he looked like when the boye happened. But I think it could be an extra layer of torture for William. All of his murders were of children, I'm sure he felt children were beneath and their lives inconsequential, so a child tormenting him would be an added layer psychologically. He was an abusive narcissist so a young Michael, a mini version of him, the child he looked down on could also be worst and Mike would know that.
Yeah, when I was young my hair was really blonde, it turned dark blonde/brown-ish over the years. Wouldn’t be that uncommon a thing to have happened to Michael if he started off blonde.
thank you for this moment of communal hyperfixating! ^-^
I like the idea that mike is the vengeful spirit, cuz then the scene with old man consequences is also saying "youve suffered enough. Rest now, because you dont belong here." Mike has been dealing with the consequences of his own actions his entire life.
4 months later, and your first video STILL, shows up as one of the first recommendations for this theory reaction. Just FYI. 🥰
I interpreted the child-like voice/visage in UCN might be Michael using Cassidy's voice/visage to taunt William, since, based on DPT's theory, William had some kind of "love" (real or not) for Cassidy. Salt in the wound kind of thing, maybe?
i cant wait for you to see who they think the vengeful spirit is
I subscribe to this theory *very* passionately. I LOVE the idea that it all leads up to a very powerful narrative conclusion of Michael being the Vengeful Spirit torturing Afton in hell. I really like that it all loops full circle.
Connie and Cori are freakishly good theorists and story writers. I love the narrative they cooked up. Even if some things are controversial, likeee the Golden Freddy suit being what we're put into for night 4 of Sister Location.
Actually, lemme go on a whole rant about that, I want to be known here. If you can disprove any of this, feel free!
I actually do think it's not unplausible that Golden Freddy was the suit Michael was put in for SL night 4. We are *never* explicitly shown how animatronics with springlocks look like internally or function besides that one that we're put into, and it has faceplates that open. This makes it the *only* reference for how *ANY* springlock suit may operate.
We know how the FNAF 1 animatronics work, they're endoskeletons underneath an outer shell, and they have one faceplate that mechanically raises up to reveal the inside of the mask. This is shown to us in the repair minigames in Help Wanted. We also know how the Funtimes work thanks to the Sister Location jumpscares and Funtime Freddy's repair. They are infinitely more complex internally, but they have four faceplates, two for the top half of the face, and two for the bottom.
Given that Afton built that bunker and those animatronics, I'd like to say that the quad faceplates are his trademark. They are on literally nearly every animatronic down there, after all, even the Bidybabs. Since he was also the main owner of Fredbear's Family Diner (if we go by DPT's theory and just general speculation on my end), it's not unsafe to say that those animatronics may also have similar functionality.
All this to say, who's to say that Fredbear and Spring Bonnie *don't* have sectioned faceplates that open for general maintenance? We can't even determine what animatronic it could be based on the shape of the faceplates, they have an accompanying outer shell over them on the Springlock series animatronics. The faceplates can clearly open with a person inside, springlocks engaged or otherwise. We can't actually prove or disprove it being GF/Fredbear, because we were never actually shown these suits in function. The closest we get is Afton helping an employee suit up inside of Fredbear with the full head intact, but that doesn't prove or disprove that they do or don't have sectioned faceplates.
So, whether or not it *is* or *isn't* Golden Freddy is completely unsolvable at the moment. We have no frame of reference.
If you look closely at the way the faceplates of the FNAF 1 animatronics open, you can clearly see they don't have a split in the middle and the jaw stays in place while the rest of the plate opens. This directly contradicts the face shape of the SL animatronic which has a split that goes down the whole face with the mouth being in two parts, not one.
If Golden Freddy's face had those splits in it, I'd be inclined to agree, but it just doesn't and neither does Spring Bonnie. On top of all of that, the suit we're in during night 4 doesn't have teeth. Golden Freddy very clearly does. And I'm fairly certain the only reference to who built the Fredbear and Spring Bonnie mechanisms is when they are credited to Henry, not William.
You can say there's no way to know, but you do have to scoot around the evidence against it to do so.
@@ShesNervous You don't really have to scoot around it? You can quite easily argue for or against either side of the coin. (I'm not trying to be difficult, I love the debate.)
1. The FNAF 1 animatronics are *different* than the SL ones. Using the SL animatronics' faceplates as a reference to the FNAF 1 animatronics is moot, the FNAF 1 animatronics don't have quad-faceplates to begin with (and I noted this! they have one faceplate, the one that raises). As for Golden Freddy, he is *NOT* a FNAF 1/Freddy Fazbear's Pizza animatronic *OR* a Sister Location animatronic. He is a Fredbear's Family Diner animatronic, and a collaboration between William and Henry at that. Those animatronics from FFD are for a fact built differently to both FNAF 1 animatronics and SL animatronics (neither of those generation animatronics feature springlocks), though we have never seen SB or GF open any faceplates.
We don't even actually *know* if Fredbear or Spring Bonnie have them. All we do have is that springlock suit we're locked into, which tells us that at least one springlock suit- whether Fredbear, Spring Bonnie, or some other suit- *does* have faceplates. So we have some evidence that they do, and that those faceplates are quad-faceplates.
2. The teeth argument is good! Though we do know based on the animatronics in the backroom of presumably FFD (from the after-night minigames in FNAF 4 where CC gets locked into it) that the suit heads of the animatronics can be removed to show only their endoskeleton. We can't reasonably say that it wasn't removed.
This is a great point anyway for me, as I feel like it'd be weird narratively for the outer shell to be removed for "insert random reason here" or "scott didn't think about that." It could be explained away (dead kids put Michael in suit, had to remove head to figure out how to do that), but it's not strong enough.
3. Henry and William both built the animatronics. Sorry for that, I wasn't trying to exclude Henry from the building process. They had to have collaborated, otherwise William wouldn't be able to build them on his own to such polish, in secret, sans-Henry, with even more complicated mechanisms and operations. Though Henry probably (I have no frame of reference for this, my knowledge about Henry is drier than the Sahara) designed and built the springlocks.
Tbh there's genuinely a lack of evidence confirming that it is Golden Freddy, as well as a lack of evidence denying that it is Golden Freddy. That suit is up in the air. There *is* just no way to know from inside of the random springlock suit. It could be any springlock suit, but we only know of two.
We don't even know that it can't be Spring Bonnie. Baby's line about it not being used "the way it was supposed to" could hint to that. She'd have to know about it, though. She might, if she's working with the other dead kids. Who knows?
The only thing that we have to go on with that timeline is that William ends up in a certain Spring Bonnie that was sitting in a backroom at some random time before, during, or after SL, but before the events of FNAF 3. He could've moved it to that bunker from SL later. But we also have no full evidence that he did or didn't return to his bunker after SL, either. Anything could've happened, the narrative hasn't told us. The time between SL and FNAF 3 is massive. :(
59:53 I actually really like this because there is this one scene in the sister location trailer of all the animatronic like up close and when it gets to Funtime foxy you can see a reflection in his cheek that looks like the puppet. The others have parts of them reflected, like circus baby’s microphone. But foxy has a reflection of what seems to be the puppet (I recommend you check this out because I remember someone mentioning this but I’m not sure if I remember it correctly).
I could just SO see William taking Puppet to experiment on her to try to recreate that level of awareness.
@@ShesNervous mhm, knowing that the puppet would be the only fully possessed animatronic and pretty powerful, i would think that william wouldnt melt down her remnent and instead experiment on possession.
Not in the Fnaf universe, but that exact thing you’re asking for of the spirit reverting to their younger self on death is seen in the final episode of demon slayer’s entertainment district arc, where the upper moon 3 demon’s spirits are conversing as or after they die, the sister specifically doing this
Yeah, I'm aware of it happening outside of FNAF in a number of pieces of media!
i think a lot of people have made their points about how it makes sense for Michael to revert into a child form, and i agree. i just want to add to the discussion that abuse generates an emotional growth stunt, specially if it is suffered at a very young age. we indeed don't know the behaviour of Willshitiam before CC/Cassidy and Elizabeth appearances, but it is very likely Michael suffered neglect and other forms of child abuse from a very young age, being the only child and then becoming the "failure" after, you know, everything.
there's also the fact that, into his adulthood, we know he was at the service of William, obeying and not questioning the things he was esposed to out of being terrified of the monster his father is, but also expecting his love and the guilt from kickstarting his brother's death. this is very similar to a possible infantilisation perceived by Michael, since he has had to fend for himself, probably since his late teens or earlier, so the process of growth we consider as normal is one very twisted in his context.
so yeah, viewing it also from the point of analysis that this is Michael's spirit, not his body and decaying one, it makes more sense for it to reflect, not the state of his body at the moment of his (second??) death, but his actual state of mind.
I hear everyone. I'm not even sure where I implied the issue was that it doesn't psychologically track? DPT explains it very well in the video.
None of you reiterating this addresses that this has never occurred in this franchise before or after nor does it address why Adult Michael has a British accent and the Vengeful Spirit notably does not.
I mean no harm, but I just disagree with the argument.
@@ShesNervous truetrue. that would've been replicated in other instances, even in the books, where it would actually make sense and they have the opportunity to do it. i mean, i never really thought you even implied or denied all we're talking about here MFMSMS. it's just interesting to build the discussion around the character development without using the repetitive themes of fnaf as a base, which, in itself, is really odd when trying to build a solid storyline, but i guess works¿ idk
Immortal and the restless represents the parallels between Mike and William, both are ‘vampires’, living off of remanent for decades, immortal can technically be multiple in certain old English contexts as well
Thank you for reviewing this. You are a real leader in validating these new Theorists.
They deserve it! 🙌
THE MAMAS KUDOS FOR SAYING THAT FOR SPILLING WOOOOOOO I LOVE WHEN MY FAVOURITE INTERESTS OVERLAP!! LOVE YOU EVEN MORE NOW (still in the middle of the video lol, i agree with basically like all of ur takes)
Humble brag I talked to Ganja Lestranja on the phone 😎 she's so sweet
@@ShesNervous WHAT OMG THATS THE COOLEST THING EVER!! Love that for u
1. love the fandom name "nervous system" 10/10
2. im so glad you changed what you changed, i couldn't stop thinking abt it as i watched the first video lol
1. thank you!
2. YOU'RE WELCOME 😂
I love this theory so much. Your reactions are the same ones I had and I'm here for it
I'd like to imagine that when Charlie was alive the music box was something special to her. Something that could sooothe her in life or death. And William would probably know something like this since him and Henry's families were somewhat close.
The beauty of the nightmare gas (screwy as it is), is it can explain how fnaf 4 can be Michael, not CC, and also explain the stomach hatches. Because Michael could have merged together both CC and Elizabeth’s deaths, either during the experiments or after the fact if he continued to have nightmares (because going through that could easily give him PTSD fueled nightmares)
I think the reason the vengeful spirit looks and sounds like a child is because that is how Michael decided to present himself to William.
so, hear me out......... logically the vengeful spirit (Michael) has at least some control over what William sees and hears... so what better way to present himself to him than a little child?
Michael wants William to see and hear that the cause of his hell is, a child. "a child" William's main victims, a defenseless "child"
the fact that "a child" is the one who is torturing him is, for Michael, the perfect revenge against William's enormous ego.
At the same time, it is revealed to us (the players) and to William that this child is Michael, the one whom William willingly and knowingly sent to his death. This type of revelation is VERY often used in storytelling... very, very often used.
One in which a character is trapped and his captor or the person behind his imprisonment at first is not physically seen as someone the character recognizes, but it is through dialogue (I've been looking for you, you KNEW I would catch you at some point, let me PUT YOU BACK TOGTHER....etc.) and visually (the nightmare animatronics ) clues to things that only the character and his captor would know.
It doesn't seem at all illogical to me to think that Scott chose that kind of storyteling to tell this part of the story.
Actually I did think of a reason for Michael reverting to a child when he died, although it’s kinda a loose connection it could make sense.
We know Scott is a Christian and in the Bible it says that people in a sense sort of revert to a perfect or specific version of themselves.
So if Michael is meant to be the “big good” so to speak, that could be sort of a play on that idea?
He could have reverted back to a stage in life where his father being a psycho wasn’t quite clear yet, before crying child died or perhaps was even born. A state where everything was still good and perfect, before everything went wrong. Which would be the “perfect” version of himself.
It’s a really loose connection but it was a thought I had.
What if afton used recordings of crying child for balloon boy’s voice and that’s why in FNAF 3 he follows the sound? Not because he hears just any kid call for him but because he hears HIS kid call for him.
Thanks for another video about that awesome theory
Okay, regarding to your question at the end - was there ever an instance of someone dying but then their soul appears to be younger, let me introduce you to the very last episode of the TV show supernatural (SPOILERS AHEAD IF YOU PLAN TO WATCH)
In the very last episode, Dean dies on a hunt, while his younger brother Sam continues living. He ultimately dies of old age, and meets with Dean, in heaven, on a bridge where the story began. Now, one thing that was interesting is that Sam appeared to be *the same age as he was when Dean died*. He didn't have his dumb mop gray hair, he didn't have troubles walking, he was Sam, around 40-45 years old, that greeted Dean on that bridge. It's heavily implied that Sam's soul *died with Dean*, as the brothers have been through everything together, and had died multiple times protecting each other. Family was a big theme of the show, and it made sense for Sam's soul to die alongside Dean, maybe not completely, as Sam went on to have a life, but a big piece of it for sure, especially because they were finally set free of the big bad they've fought, basically their entire lives. Yes, Sam did have a life after Dean died. But none of it was as enjoying, because he missed his big brother.
Same thing could be said for Michael. He might have not been completely responsible for Cassidy's death, but he initiated it, he stuffed the kid in the jaws of Fredbear. The injury he brought upon Cassidy was what set William off to stuff Cassidy in the suit, and inevitably kill him. He didn't intend for the prank to go as far. As Dual Process mentioned, it's quite possible that he didn't really hate Cassidy, but was rather angry because he had an absent father and hell, maybe he was bullying the kid to get attention from William, even if it was scolding. It makes sense for Michael to revert in age - William should see the kid he broke all those years ago, when he chose his creations over and over again, instead of his own kids.
I am looking for examples within the FNAF universe, but thank you for sharing!
Dang I absolutely nailed the timing of finding your channel, huh? Just saw Pt 1 and here’s pt 2!
I just found your channel a few days ago from Rye Toast and your videos are sooooo good. We really are in peak FNAF with the amount of people making theories.
my interpretation of michael looking younger as a spirit is referring back to michael being the kid in fnaf 4, this is where he was experimented on, where he lost himself and where a lot of his trauma comes from. he's still just a kid punishing the person that he couldn't stand up to when he was younger almost like DID (dissociative identity disorder) or MPD (multiple personality disorder). this could even explain why sometimes michael always obeys william and other times will directly go against orders, i.e. messing with the animatronics, going to the gravesite, not taking care of his siblings when told. he definitely has enough trauma to cause DID or MPD, and could explain why he shows up as a kid, this is the version of himself that's protected him all these years who's taken all the punishment and torture and can now finally fight back. this is the version, face and voice of the one he shouldn't have killed, the kid the william neglected and the childhood he destroyed.
10:43 ok idk shit about fnaf lore this is a recent hyperfixation for me but i feel like it doesnt make sense for the cc to have seen elizabeth die anyways because wasnt circus baby programmed to grab a child when the child is alone? if cc saw elizabeth then, elizabeth wouldn't be alone so why would baby even activate?
also for michael being represented as a kid, that reminds me of age regression due to trauma. idk about the meaning of the depiction in the series itself tho
"This is not worth my energy" ... oh she's gonna really drop off at some point huh?
"Toy Chica design discourse"
To be honest, Cassie ans Cassidy sounds like a Disney show
Ngl i found you through their video.
A very intriguing and compelling Theory, I wonder what they cover next.
Also, fair and valid points and opinions, I guess we’ll see how this affects things.
Man, im so sad you got spoiled, i was bracing myself for the second NEWSFLASH ASSHOLE that got me totally by surprise ib my first watch lmao
I'm not really much of a theorist, but, I do have one theory. Though 80% of it is working off of stuff other people thought of, the rest just me putting the pieces together.
Okay, so, I'll start this with a question... Why do you think so many of the animatronics in Pizza sim act so.. different? Baby goes from wanting to scup her dad, to becoming a daddy's girl, and Lefte is... Well, why would Charlie even want to kill us to begin with? And shouldn't Henry have designed and programmed Lefte to NOT kill people?
Molten Freddy is also just... weird. In different ways depending on how they're interpreted. Like, even if they're just killing because they're programmed to because 'funtimes' ...they're not the ones who kill. They're the distractions- Circus Baby is the one who kills. And yet... They kill now.
Regardless, 2 or 3 out of 4 of the animatronics act weird, or differently in FNAF 6, than they normally would.
My theory is on WHY.
William Afton, is controlling the animatronics around him.
There's precedent for this in the books and the movie. The entire plot of them involves him controlling the spirits haunting the animatronics... Why wouldn't he be doing the same here? Why couldn't he control his daughter to be a Daddy's girl, and Lefte and Molten Freddy into being able to kill Micheal
I believe Baby's shift is a result of gaining additional remnant/agony from Mike, tbh. She eventually realizes that whoever was down there wasn't her dad, so it's possible she then believes that the horrible things her dad did to her were done by who she killed... Mike. A lot of people change their ideas of the absent parent with additional context, even turning on their custodial parent. With that in mind, Baby has the perfect excuse to be manipulated into siding with William, by pinning all the blame on Mike. The narrative is so easy, too. "Your older brother, who bullied & killed the Crying Child, grows up & gets fired for "tampering with the animatronics", and objectively *did* work for William, so he could be blamed for *also* messing up Baby, who goes on to kill William's daughter. He hated this family." Etc., etc.
As for Lefty, while Henry made a lot of animatronics, my bet is that he made them on a budget, probably using parts, and remnant/agony laden parts from William's past parts & animatronics, which works for him anyway, because he wants *everything* sorted shut. Charlie has also said that she wants the UCN player, which this theory assumes to be Mike, "out of her way". We've known she's not against killing since we met her.
The Funtimes all kill. They're scrambled spirits, unlike Baby. If they're haunted, they aren't working properly. They likely never were to begin with because of all the remnant mixing, and I personally suspect they weren't finished.
Afton wasn't "controlling" the spirits in the movie, he lead them by tricking them into thinking he was their friend. They were acting of their own free will, which is why they turn on him in the climax.
In regards to ghosts not aging;
Michael technically died as warly as SL, from then on he simply possessed himself?
And/or;
Its Young Michael (mental state) not having to devolve as far back
I like some of the conclusions but I don't know how well some of the logic stands up (the deference to different sources of canon sometimes varies a little too wildly for me, and I think they go a little too far in pushing for the Cassidy is Crying Child even though I agree with the theory in concept). I'm looking forward to seeing how they develop as theorists and where they go from here, once they fine tune their channel's voice.
EDIT: so I was at work for a. 12 hr shift. ( Thanks for the long form content SAN.. ) I went back and rewatched the 83 bite mini scene, and I was wrong there is no alligator bro I was thinking of Freddy mask. But alligator mask is still present on the backgrounds. So it could still be a Henry centered character.
original : F.... What if and hewr me out.... Aligstor mask bro during the bite of 93 is... Not a bro... Its vanessa . And vanessa is Henrys Older daughter...
Dual Process, Rye Toast, MatPat... does IDs Fantasy, Fuhnaff, and John of Game Theory have cats? I know there are more, but those are the ones off the top of my hea- Hyperdroid!
these are great thank you
from my understanding of ghosts and spirits. they can portray themselves how they would like. now in FNAF we haven’t seen anybody do this. however, ghosts don’t have to portray themselves as how they die.
At 1:19:30 what was the connection that was being made? Im confused and slow 😅
I think Michael is using Cassidy's likeness instead of his own, as is saying "look at what we've done"
In a cartoon sense, I imagined chica looks like mollie macaw from indigo park, more birdlike.
This theory makes me wanna take my own crack at a timeline but I’m scared I’ll be flamed all to heck…
bro the circus baby line 🤓
Random theory: Michael Afton is adopted but William is his biological father from an illegitimate relationship with Henry's wife
It COULD but doesn't necessarily connect back to Silver Eyes. Perhaps Vanessa is Michael's twin.
This is highly speculative, but I think it would make some sense. William doesn't accept Michael as his son. Even possibly attempts to brainwash him to be similar to the crying child.
You're very charming and witty on camera.
I'm gonna watch you're vids for a while😊
pretty cool for golden freddy to be in the same room as mangle in the fnaf 2 save them minigame if this theory is true
I do not agree with the idea that Michael is TOYSNHK, however, for those looking for an explanation of why he uses a kid voice that could be one of two things:
1. Thats not Michael doing that but that is how William views and thinks of michael (he's always this little kid of his who can never quite do what hes told). Or
2. This is michael purposely being the little kid as an added level of torture to william as he knows william only ever thinks of him as a child thats incapable of doing what hes told and to add insult to injury michael makes it so William is surrounded by his creations, nightmares, actions, and the people he looked down on and constantly manipulated. Maybe it boils williams blood more hearing the child voice of michael and being totally powerless in the situation etc...
A thought I just had was, and idk if it matters, but when were the bodies removed from the original animatronics? If part of William’s motivation for being active during FNAF2 was because they were going to reuse the animatronics with bodies inside.
i honestly like the idea of cassidy being cassie. It helps fill my personal gap with stitchlinegames. I felt like the theory made cassidy a throw away character and irrlevant to the lore. But saying cassidy is cassie and still important helps out alot.
Hello from germany
Hallo! Mein freund spricht Deutsch! Not fluently but very well. Studied in school and teaches me sometimes.
monster inc. is now canon in fnaf
about the suit in SL night 4 could it possibly the security puppet in FNAF 6?
the facial shape would match up perfectly and has a funtime facial pattern that opens up
In regards to the Monsters Inc comparison at 7:15 , if agony is the energy that the monsters gain from children’s screams, would that make when they switch to using laughter at the end of the movie them harvesting remnant since remnant is supposedly based upon positive memories?
YES!
I always thought that the game crashing with omc was an end to the game and the soul finding peace I think if VS is Michael that could be the explanation as to where he is in the mimic era
49:14 wouldn't scott, like tell him the emotions the voice actor should express ?
I really really think Baby stayed in Michael cause how else would his eyes still work...The others escaping to the sewer once they voted her out may show that Baby was always in control of moving the endoskeletons
It isn't clear how the functional a body needs to be for possession to work. As a zombie, his eyes might just work because they are still eye-shaped and his possession makes his ghost eyes real enough to see.
I don’t think “dream theory” was ever real.
In the dawko interview when Scott is explaining how he wanted each game to give a different experience he said that while he was making Fnaf 3 he had already planned Fnaf 4 and Fnaf 5.
Fnaf 5 being Sister Location. If he already had SL planned before Fnaf 3 was even out then it can’t be a pivot away from Dream Theory.
Also in the build up to UCN when Scott was revealing the characters that would be in the game he made fun of several fan theories that were popular at one point or another but were never real like “Good Guy Foxy” and “Phone Guy Is Purple Guy”.
And along side those he made fun of Dream Theory too. He lumped the mocking of Dream Theory along side 2 other theories that were never true.
So Scott sees Dream Theory on the same level as good guy Foxy and Phone Guy is Purple Guy.
That's fair. I like the idea of FNAF 4 being experiments a lot more anyway just to signify how twisted Afton is.
Scott didn't have the story planned out he said so himself in the interview and in fact that segment where he talks about thinking of fnaf 4-5 during fnaf 3 isn't to do with lore its to do with colour palettes and approaches to setting. No concrete ideas or anything he even says that he never had the story planned out.
Dream theory being joked about by Scott isn't evidence that it was never canon, it can be easily explained Scott acknowledging a poor writing decision he almost stuck with and is joking about it, that doesn't inherently mean he views it the same as those other theories.
@@johnman8398 but the fact he was planing a game after Fnaf 4 shows that Fnaf 4 was never the end, for Dream Theory to ever be true Fnaf 4 would have to be the end because once it’s revealed that all of the games aren’t real and are just the hallucinations of a kid in a coma (which makes absolutely no since given basic information from the games) there’s no more story: There’s no murderer, there’s no haunted animatronics, there’s no mysteries. It’s just the real world.
@@jk844100 He only made plans for another game after he saw the reception the game got and changed course but originally that was meant to be the end. It all being the dreams of a kid in a coma does make sense (anything that doesn't make sense can be straight up be answered by saying its a dream). Also Dream theory doesn't inherently mean there's no murder, animatronics or mystery all it means are that the events depicted in the games so far never happened but perhaps something similar happened in reality.
@@johnman8398 “he only made plans for another game after he saw the reception the game got and changed course”
But he said had plans for a Fnaf 5 before 3 was even out. You even agreed to that.
Why would a kid from 1983 dream about being a security guard in 1987, 1992, and 2015 with a pay slip that also has correct inflation values for the time?
There is irl cases of when people get their childhoods snatched away when they get older they become more childish talke George Washington’s mother as a example she was married at a young aged forced to raise like six kids and her husband died so she raised them all on her own there are cases of her claiming George doesn’t take care of her and stuff like that when he does but all this to say Mike may have reverted back to a child like state because his childhood was snatched away by either the bite or the nightmare gas
Yeah, the only part I am not 100% convinced in this theory is Michael being the Vengeful Spirit. CCassidy makes more sense, HOWEVER Michael is more satisfying.
I think I'm going to do a theory soon including the evidence I feel like they missed or didn't include since it was irrelevant to their point.
I think a very strong case can be made for CC that doesn't negate Mike's arc.
@@ShesNervous Exactly! The two brothers involved in the inciting incident, either of them finishing the story in a way would be cool.
can i ask what the change for the better is? i get that the plushies are gone from the right but i don't understand
Personally i think the whole Michael being reverted to a kid wasn't what happened I think more that Michael was using an image of his face as a kid as a taunt instead. Just my 3 cents
Abuisve perspective
Elizebeth is the Golden Child
Mike possibly the scape gout
CC / Cassidy just there he’s not as bad as Mike but Liz is still the best of all (maybe because she is a girl you know sexism mixed with favortive tisum)
Edit:
Mike is the wosrt because he is the oldest the first failer. With the age gap maybe a mistake child
Cassidy was another male another fail if he wanted a girl but maybe this time planned. He doesn’t care about Cassidy but he doesn’t hate him as much, that why his lines are so bland threw fedbear and that might also be linked to the more feminine assisted name
Elizebeth was the girl he finally wanted the one he loves over the others. He cares about Cassidy but he isn’t as important
Maybe having him be brought back was because Lizzy was upset with her brother missing, so she could have a sibling a friend even if William want to found of him
Honestly dream theory was never correct t hippo confirmed so the puppets in universe role at the pizza place was to give prizes
Ok monsters inc vibes is too accurate, you've ruined fnaf for me. On a side note, if mike is the vengeful spirit, why would william call for his help?
22:50
YES
Genshin also had an instance where someone died while they were older, but they were still a child as a ghost.
I am asking for examples of that happening in FNAF.
@ShesNervous Ah sorry! I don't think I can recall that happening or being stated in the fnaf games.
4 comments
😂😂😂 👏👏👏
If I had to give a criticism to your video it’s that you force a narrative too much. Where instead of understanding where there coming from at times you look back to your own theories and base it from there.
noted!
I legit missed the talkback stream by about half a minute, so I'll just comment here.
William didn't kill Michael. In fact, Michael says exactly the opposite: "I should be dead, but I'm not." That line confirms that Michael was alive the whole time, or he's dead & he's not aware of that, debunking the "he intentionally possessed himself" interpretation. Also, the logic the video presents for why Michael blames William for his death is... confusing to me. Michael is just talking about how he went down there & freed his sister, as William asked. I don't see the connection they're making there.
William knew Michael would die and sent him anyway. Michael doesn't blame elizabeth, but blames William
William knew they would attack his son Michael, as he looks close enough like him to these possessed funtime animatronics. He has been abusive to Mike already in the past, so it seemed like a realistic trade he'd attempt with his own son. When Michael finally understands the situation, he's kinda angry that his father would do that to him. To willfully send him on a suicide mission, that is how Will attempted to get rid of Mike. But something went wrong and he isn't fully done in by Ennard. If you listen closely he doesn't sound exactly normal, like the vocal chords are mechanically resonating as an animatronic would. He should be dead, but he is something else. I wouldn't call that living either.
@@thymii Saying William knew they would attack Michael is speculative at best. And again, even if it is true, how would Michael know that? Nothing in his monologue suggests that he does. He sounds sad more than anything.
And yeah, Michael sounds robotic, but he's still alive regardless. It doesn't matter what state he's in.
@@UnoriginalJokester Yes this is speculation, glad you caught up. We're reading between the lines of obscure statements. Nothing will be handed to us so easily.
My interpretation of the "I should be dead but I'm not" line has always been that Michael is saying: "I should be dead" ie 'I shouldn't be in this world still. I shouldn't be able to think, move, actually, talk, etc still.' that to him being truly dead entails having moved on/not existing anymore, yet he still is. He's 'not dead' in the sense that he can still walk, talk, act - not that it's proof he isn't a spirit possessing his own body. If you think about what we know happened to Michael logically, then he can't be surviving without being a spirit possessing his dead body (whether or not he realises that's what's happening). The only way Ennard is going to fit inside Michael's body is if there's extra room in there - the scooper literally removed at least some of Michael's flesh & organs to allow Ennard to hide in him. The mirror scene shows Michael's silhouette with definitely robotic eyes, which to me says he literally doesn't have his eyes anymore (though tbf that then begs the question of how Michael goes undetected after Ennard leaves - no eyes, probably a large hole in his chest, his skin decaying and going purple) and if Ennard is managing to get robotic eyes up in Michael's eye sockets, doesn't that suggest he may not even have a brain anymore to fit Ennard's head up there? Same with how Ennard controlled the movement of Michael's limbs - suggests to me that muscle or bone got removed for Ennard to fit, so Micheal is literally almost entirely just a skin suit that Ennard can wear as a disguise. There's no surviving that. Michael has to be a spirit possessing himself. After Ennard leaves his body he even collapses to the ground (don't forget that through these scenes his body has been literally turning purple too - he's decaying & the neighbours can see it) and then white pinpricks of light appear in his eyes (that suggests supernatural to me) before he rises to his feet in a way that screams 'ghost possessing something' to me, since he doesn't get to his knees, then push himself up with his hands like a normal person who's getting up from the floor would.
So overall, I don't think there's any way to argue Michael didn't die in SL. He's definitely his spirit possessing his dead body. The question instead is whether he understands that that's what happened. (Though personally with the state his body is in, the fact he says he's been having to live in the shadows, and how much he's interacted with possessed animatronics in the past, I can't see him not knowing it's possible for spirits to live on - though it'd probably be a shock that he can possess his body & it doesn't just have to happen with an animatronic, which is maybe why he seems confused and says "I should be dead" - and understanding that that's most likely what's happening to him)
I don't care about the lore
Then.. scroll past the video?? If you don't care why are you watching a video on it? More specifically someone TALKING about a video on the lore? Someone who doesn't care just scrolls past.
ngl i kind of love it for them that they don't even care 😂
I think Michael is using Cassidy's likeness instead of his own, as is saying "look at what we've done"
I've seen a lot of people say stuff to this effect and I really do like it.
I don't know if I believe it but I will keep it in my "file" so to speak because it is compelling.