Just wanted to say that I really appreciate all the support, feedback, theories etc. from everyone. Hoping to have another FNAF video covering Into the Pit finished very soon!
This video perfectly encapsulates my main issue with how this series presents its story. In trying to be crpytic, some seemingly important details can (and do) get lost in the weeds which cause ALOT of contradictions and the possibility for practically any interpretation to be true. It's frustrating. Seriously, when I saw the graves representing the Missing Children and Charlotte in Help Wanted 2, I just about threw my hands up for pretty much all the reasons you listed for them.
A detail that people overlook when it comes to Charlotte's death is that in the FNAF 2 "Give Cake" minigame, Charlotte's eyes widen, and she cries even more when William Afton steps out of his car. I feel this could suggest that Charlotte knew exactly who William was before she got killed. She was probably aware of how evil William was which ramped up her fear of him even more. This can mean that the beef between William and Henry started way before the death of Charlotte, making Henry's statement of "A wound first inflicted on me" true, just not in the sense that Charlotte was the first child to die.
"A wound first inflicted" could be a lot less literal than I think (it is FNAF after all), but I just give it a bit more importance than some other bits because it feels a little less ambiguous than most of the other evidence and its said in the game that basically exists to wrap up the story up to the point. As always though, very open to being wrong
Sounds sound but we need to remember that this story line was not entirely realised in early games, in fnaf2 give cake minigame Charlet was not named and was a "Him", at this point it was someone special who was not part of the give gift give life minigame which confirmes 5 other victims. At somepoint the cake victim was given the identity of Charlet
Elizabeth was first 1. empty room, she's nowhere to be found for 5 days 5 DAYS why? because she's dead 2. why would the baby already be murdering? because William is a psychopath, he has no excuse for this in the Trilogy and in the movie, he only has a daughter and still kills + William accidentally kills his daughter in each of these worlds 3. we don't have anywhere else to put it + Midnight motories which is already confirmed that William is the yellow guy and runs away from the scene of the crime most likely Charlie shows that at this point he only has 1 child left Mike
I’m almost certain that it isn’t the case - or at least that it wasn’t Cawthon’s intent at the time - but the idea that the assumed grave behind the house in Midnight Motorist belongs to Mrs. Afton pleases me immensely.
I’m so glad you made this video pointing out every piece of evidence we have. Whenever I ask myself the question of who was first, a lot of this evidence is forgotten about in my mind.
I think what I have learned from this video (and honestly any FNAF theory video) is that you can literally make ANY FNAF theory sound good, and at the same time, said theory can be contradicted by any one detail in the games/books/movie. There will always be evidence that suggests one thing is true and there will always be evidence that suggests that said thing is false.
From my perspective, I think Williams motive will come from Fallfest and how Henry maybe caused a fire and death around it. The wound first inflicted on him doesn't mean it has to be Charlie, but his brand since he built the animatronics. William could've tried to ruin the brand by killing kids around it, the last one being Charlie. Also, we know Crying Child is before Charlie because his happens at Fredbears while Charlie's happens at Freddy Fazbears. Chica says I've seen everything. Now, I want to bring up something from real life. Death and their distance from each other doesn't really matter because Chica could've died at Freddys and then 6 months later, Fritz could've died and they would be chucked into the same case due to the similarities for their deaths/disappearance. We've know that there were five MCI and then there's Charlie. Whose to say CC isn't apart of the MCI and that Charlie happened as the final kill? This leads to Golden Freddy who has never been shown in games to have two spirits. We've only seen 5 or 6 kids ever as a group. Never seven. Either way, Charlie being after also makes sense since we know that they weren't possessing the animatronics until Charlie linked the. That could add to the point since we know the 5 kids didn't die together. They just died at the same place. So then why wasn't Chica immediately starting to act weird weeks or months before... because Charlie only died after the MCI. She was the catalyst to bring everyone together and allow them to possess the suits. To conclude, the reasons why Charlie doesn't have to be first is: 1. Henry's line doesn't have to mean that his daughter was killed but his business is under fire because of the murders. 2. They aren't immediately possessed and their deaths happened apart from each other just at the same place. This would mean Charlie was either slow af or she didn't die just yet to give them that power to possess the animatronics. 3. This is strengthen by real world happenings which can group a bunch of cases together based on their smiliar situations. Therefore, Charlie doesn't have to be before the MCI.
The reason people need Afton to have a logical reason for what he does is because remnant changed everything. The first 3 games gave no hint that Afton was anything other than just some guy offing kids simply because he could with all the supernatural stuff being a consequence of his actions (and you can argue that the Give Gifts, Give Life minigame in FNAF 2 pointed at the Puppet being the one who stuffed the bodies in the animatronics). Then Sister Location and the books come out and instead start painting him as a robotics genius mad scientist trying to become immortal and gave him a completely different method of offing people (hyperadvanced robo minions and death traps instead of the old fashioned way). The series retconned a clear motivation onto him, so there's no longer any reason for him to be doing things that contradict or just don't advance his goal.
Personally, I prefer GiBi's explanation of Midnight Motorist (And his timeline of events as I feel it has the most solid evidence and is most narratively satisfying to me, personally) which is that, like the Fruity Maze minigame showed an instance of William kidnapping a kid, Midnight Motorist is just meant to show another instance. And then the Security Puppet minigame shows William killing Charlie. Each from a different perspective: Fruity Maze from victim. Midnight Motorist from parent. Security Puppet from Puppet. A drunken/abusive father coming home, late at night (Later that night being later after the driving section, purple is commonly used as a stand-in for black or "shadows" in the games, so the car being purple only says that it's a black or darker colored car (Then further, Five Laps At Freddy's doesn't exactly prove anything? I mean, the Ultimate Encyclopedia has a bunch of conflicting information and that's meant to be an "official" guide into the lore)). His kid has broken out of his window after seeing Spring Bonnie outside, beckoning him to come play earlier in the night (When the driving section happened most likely) and the father gets pissed, showing this isn't the first time the kid has snuck off to "that place" (Hinted at being Freddy's). Common arguments against this theory: 1) It's raining! The springlocks would've clamped shut! It's raining when the father gets home. Not necessarily when the kidnap/luring happened. 2) But all the children vanished AT Freddy's! The newspaper clips said so! The newspaper clips said two kids vanished at Freddy's specifically and three more cases were linked to it. Susie definitely vanished at Freddy's, as shown by Fruity Maze. Other kids could've been lured off the streets and led back to Freddy's where they were then killed. 3) But what about the grave?! There's nothing saying that's definitely a grave. It could just be breaking ground for a construction project. It's a mound of dirt on the ground. Even if it is a grave, it could also just be the grave of Susie's dog as she would've been killed already ("I was the first, I have seen everything") 4) But the rain is the same as in Charlie's death scene! Reused assets are a thing. Just because it's raining in both scenes does NOT mean it's definitely the same night. Again, Later That Night can just as easily be referring to later from the initial driving minigame. 5) Not being allowed into Jrs? It's a bar. He's drunk. He's already been kicked out. The bouncer isn't going to let him back in. Whether a person chooses to believe in this version is their own choice, I just feel it's the most narratively sound. And the biggest thing to remember is that FNAF isn't real life, it's a story. So whatever a person finds as the most narratively sound will be the best choice! The answer is gonna be what Scott deems as the most narratively sound, after all!
my thoughts are that charlotte died after MCI bc we know someone was caught and convicted for the MCI. i think the convicted person was Henry and that was the "wound first inflicted on me". Or at least it could be. This could be why the Security Puppet exists too maybe??? like he made it to protect Charlotte in his absence bc he knows that he didnt do it, so the only other explanation is William in his head. William somehow gets away with it (i rlly like DPTs idea that William lied to lump CC in with MCI so that they don't suspect him as the killer) and Henry is charged instead.
I've considered the idea that it goes Missing Children/Charlie -> Elizabeth -> Crying Child. Afton kills kids cause he's a serial killer -> he notices the possession and wants to experiment further for it so he builds the funtimes to specifically capture kids and get their remnant -> he verbally tells elizabeth to stay away but that's not enough and she gets got -> since a verbal warning wasn't enough, he then uses Psychic Friend Fred Bear to encourage Crying Child's fear of the animatronics to keep him away. Of course the biggest proof that this is Not True is that the Freddy that kills CC is supposedly Golden Freddy before he fell into disrepair. If the Missing Children were murdered first, Cassidy's body would already be inside, meaning the suit would not still be in active use performing on stage. Matter of fact, there would be no reason Fred Bear and Spring Bonnie would still be in use post creation of the Fnaf 1 animatronics
I don't like it but Charlie has to die after mci. The combination of grave orders chicka "I was the first" and inputing the right code to unlock the mask is pretty explicit. Not quite as it's me Michael cutscene but still. I like the grave in the woods being Elizabeth's. It makes much more sense as hiding evidence than being crying child grave.
Here is the thing about dual process theorys order. They are not saying the bite of 83 is not separate from the mci. Cc could have been in a coma for two years and maybe even springlocked several time segments before the mci were discovered its only that he used that entire thing to cover up the desth of his son. And earn an alibi and frame henry. He lumped cc in with the mci when he was caught despite the bite being two years earlier and he had springlicked the kid at some point between that. (Or directly as it was happening.)
100% could be the case, though it does make the end of FNAF 4 feel a little odd as he's either not dying or the end takes place a while after the rest of the game. Loved a lot of their ideas in that video, just not 100% sold on all of it quite yet (though it feels like they're slowly winning me over on parts of it)
@@mt13industries here is the thing. The consensus does seem to be the main game takes place a lot longer away from the bite than the mci do. If it is not cc was moved to some test chamber after he recovered enough to walk. Everything is like a decade appart. So what is a few years and a violent flatline. Although it does change the imagry of the scene. Imagine fredbear at the end of ucn and wiliam (or whoever) looking at that and saying i will put you back together. And whoever said we are still your friends just looking at him in agony.
Fnaf vr legit shows us susie dies first, whos chica by the way. You see its been implyed that william has killed others before and way way before as well. Plus blue prints are made to help build meaning yes baby was planned to kill kids. Plus babys pizza world wasnt made nor open around the time of freddy fazbears first opening. Also just because Elizabeth wasnt their in that room doesnt mean she isnt anywhere at all because shes dead. Plus just because the tv says 1983 doesnt mean it is 1983, it legit could be 1985 because lets be honest who would wait to get revenge for anything. But if golden freddy was able to speak to the crying child and be in the same suit what does that mean? That cassidy was already dead because we know golden freddy is 2 spirits. Hell even in the books its implyed the one who cant see at all who tortured a man from their memories died earlier.
Entirely possible, especially given its William saying "remember what you saw" and he's the one potentially responsible for the nightmares with the nightmare gas that is apparently a thing
My favorite part of FNAF theories is that everyone inevitably has to take a stance on whether they think the story is good. Because if we don’t know what the story is, then we don’t KNOW that it’s narratively satisfying or consistent with its own logic. It might be though!
Any story that's not immediately clear with its characters and their motivations isn't very good imo. But making an interesting setting in order to justify the atmosphere and gameplay is what FNAF really succeeds at doing. Obviously, the mystery is a huge part of that, plus the indie horror vibe is charming as well. My favourite tidbit of FNAF lore is the Cassidy image really being a pic of Scott's son with a filter on. I am also in the camp that Pizzeria Simulator and UCN were the perfect endings for the whole series, with the Glitchtrap stuff coming off as a cheap retcon to keep selling merch.
3:13 the reason why it's because baby wasn't supposed to kill but when Henry and William work together to create circus baby Industrial errors have occurred that made circus baby a killer animatronic William Notice that something is wrong with circus baby so that why he told Elizabeth to stay away from her and to prove my point if William created circus baby to kill kids why he told Elizabeth that he created her for her and why he told Elizabeth that he *made her just for her*
The only reason people think Elizabeth is the first dead kid is the stomach mouth on nightmare fredbear which like cc would have nightmares of Circus baby with a stomach mouth if she died first BUT cc couldn't have seen it because circus baby waited until it was only Elizabeth in the room before she killed Elizabeth. Fredbear's stomach mouth can be explained by spring locks look at how the spring locks in the torso ook in the graphic novels and movie
this would kind of make sense here.. i dont know where elizabeth would fall but C.C. Must be first Evan, Elizabeth, Charlie, "Gabriel, Jeremy, Susie, Fritz, Cassidy" thats probably how it would go and FNaF 4, FNaF SL, FNaF 1, FNaF 3, FNaF 6. Fnaf 2 doesnt count because it wasnt michael playing as the guard or any of the aftons If we were to count fnaf 2 FNaF 4, FNaF SL, FNaF 2, FNaF 1, FNaF 3, FNaF 6.
"Logic doesn't apply to killing children" is a take that I really don't see enough in the FNaF theorizing community. Despite _every_ portrayal of Afton we have so far just positing that he's a madman who kills children for fun and seemingly finds a hobby out of neglecting, abusing, and even killing his own kids, people continue to try and position him as this tortured and grieving parent.
Wait I’m confused. So the missing children’s incident happened in 1985, the kid got bit in 1983, why does the crying child go later again? I think I missed something.
CC or Elizabet was probably first i think "Chicka" tries to say they were the first of the Missing Children incidednt. And for Charlet it makes to much sense for her to die after CC and Elizabeth. Edit: i belive CC was first then Charlet. If Molten MCU is true then Elizabeth dies last, i personally belive Eleziabet dies before MCI
Oh my god i just realized FNAF SL would 100% come before fnaf 1. the message: fired for foul odor smell being that when michael was scooped, removing all his organs for ennard to climb inside, his body was rotting.. so thats why SL must come before fnaf 1.
Originally intended for the gameplay to be more of a background so left it a bit darker, but also didn't want the screen to always be too busy. Editing is a big thing I'm working to improve right now so the feedback is much appreciated
This was an awesome video! I’ve got to say I was so excited during that final segment of the video. I’ve been making my own theories about the timeline and in the video I made a few months ago, I came to the same conclusion that Mrs. Afton is the first to die. It was the most exciting thing to hear another living soul say that. Cause I don’t think I’ve seen someone else talk about the security breach tapes being evidence for Mrs. Afton being first to die. My theory is kinda all over the place (as one might expect) but if you’re interested in hearing another theorist discuss that final idea and run with it for a full timeline video. Feel free to watch this video. m.ruclips.net/video/3mTxibyB2HE/видео.html
Just wanted to say that I really appreciate all the support, feedback, theories etc. from everyone. Hoping to have another FNAF video covering Into the Pit finished very soon!
What if the first one who saw everything where the friends we made along the way
i can’t believe i’m amused by yet another “friends along the way” joke
This video perfectly encapsulates my main issue with how this series presents its story. In trying to be crpytic, some seemingly important details can (and do) get lost in the weeds which cause ALOT of contradictions and the possibility for practically any interpretation to be true. It's frustrating.
Seriously, when I saw the graves representing the Missing Children and Charlotte in Help Wanted 2, I just about threw my hands up for pretty much all the reasons you listed for them.
A detail that people overlook when it comes to Charlotte's death is that in the FNAF 2 "Give Cake" minigame, Charlotte's eyes widen, and she cries even more when William Afton steps out of his car. I feel this could suggest that Charlotte knew exactly who William was before she got killed. She was probably aware of how evil William was which ramped up her fear of him even more. This can mean that the beef between William and Henry started way before the death of Charlotte, making Henry's statement of "A wound first inflicted on me" true, just not in the sense that Charlotte was the first child to die.
"A wound first inflicted" could be a lot less literal than I think (it is FNAF after all), but I just give it a bit more importance than some other bits because it feels a little less ambiguous than most of the other evidence and its said in the game that basically exists to wrap up the story up to the point. As always though, very open to being wrong
im pretty sure the widened eyes are surprise, and the crying is supposed to represent him murdering her
Sounds sound but we need to remember that this story line was not entirely realised in early games, in fnaf2 give cake minigame Charlet was not named and was a "Him", at this point it was someone special who was not part of the give gift give life minigame which confirmes 5 other victims. At somepoint the cake victim was given the identity of Charlet
Elizabeth was first
1. empty room, she's nowhere to be found for 5 days 5 DAYS
why? because she's dead
2. why would the baby already be murdering? because William is a psychopath, he has no excuse for this in the Trilogy and in the movie, he only has a daughter and still kills + William accidentally kills his daughter in each of these worlds
3. we don't have anywhere else to put it + Midnight motories which is already confirmed that William is the yellow guy and runs away from the scene of the crime
most likely Charlie shows that at this point he only has 1 child left Mike
I’m almost certain that it isn’t the case - or at least that it wasn’t Cawthon’s intent at the time - but the idea that the assumed grave behind the house in Midnight Motorist belongs to Mrs. Afton pleases me immensely.
I’m so glad you made this video pointing out every piece of evidence we have. Whenever I ask myself the question of who was first, a lot of this evidence is forgotten about in my mind.
I think what I have learned from this video (and honestly any FNAF theory video) is that you can literally make ANY FNAF theory sound good, and at the same time, said theory can be contradicted by any one detail in the games/books/movie. There will always be evidence that suggests one thing is true and there will always be evidence that suggests that said thing is false.
From my perspective, I think Williams motive will come from Fallfest and how Henry maybe caused a fire and death around it. The wound first inflicted on him doesn't mean it has to be Charlie, but his brand since he built the animatronics. William could've tried to ruin the brand by killing kids around it, the last one being Charlie. Also, we know Crying Child is before Charlie because his happens at Fredbears while Charlie's happens at Freddy Fazbears.
Chica says I've seen everything. Now, I want to bring up something from real life. Death and their distance from each other doesn't really matter because Chica could've died at Freddys and then 6 months later, Fritz could've died and they would be chucked into the same case due to the similarities for their deaths/disappearance. We've know that there were five MCI and then there's Charlie. Whose to say CC isn't apart of the MCI and that Charlie happened as the final kill? This leads to Golden Freddy who has never been shown in games to have two spirits. We've only seen 5 or 6 kids ever as a group. Never seven.
Either way, Charlie being after also makes sense since we know that they weren't possessing the animatronics until Charlie linked the. That could add to the point since we know the 5 kids didn't die together. They just died at the same place. So then why wasn't Chica immediately starting to act weird weeks or months before... because Charlie only died after the MCI. She was the catalyst to bring everyone together and allow them to possess the suits.
To conclude, the reasons why Charlie doesn't have to be first is:
1. Henry's line doesn't have to mean that his daughter was killed but his business is under fire because of the murders.
2. They aren't immediately possessed and their deaths happened apart from each other just at the same place. This would mean Charlie was either slow af or she didn't die just yet to give them that power to possess the animatronics.
3. This is strengthen by real world happenings which can group a bunch of cases together based on their smiliar situations.
Therefore, Charlie doesn't have to be before the MCI.
The reason people need Afton to have a logical reason for what he does is because remnant changed everything. The first 3 games gave no hint that Afton was anything other than just some guy offing kids simply because he could with all the supernatural stuff being a consequence of his actions (and you can argue that the Give Gifts, Give Life minigame in FNAF 2 pointed at the Puppet being the one who stuffed the bodies in the animatronics). Then Sister Location and the books come out and instead start painting him as a robotics genius mad scientist trying to become immortal and gave him a completely different method of offing people (hyperadvanced robo minions and death traps instead of the old fashioned way). The series retconned a clear motivation onto him, so there's no longer any reason for him to be doing things that contradict or just don't advance his goal.
Personally, I prefer GiBi's explanation of Midnight Motorist (And his timeline of events as I feel it has the most solid evidence and is most narratively satisfying to me, personally) which is that, like the Fruity Maze minigame showed an instance of William kidnapping a kid, Midnight Motorist is just meant to show another instance. And then the Security Puppet minigame shows William killing Charlie. Each from a different perspective: Fruity Maze from victim. Midnight Motorist from parent. Security Puppet from Puppet. A drunken/abusive father coming home, late at night (Later that night being later after the driving section, purple is commonly used as a stand-in for black or "shadows" in the games, so the car being purple only says that it's a black or darker colored car (Then further, Five Laps At Freddy's doesn't exactly prove anything? I mean, the Ultimate Encyclopedia has a bunch of conflicting information and that's meant to be an "official" guide into the lore)). His kid has broken out of his window after seeing Spring Bonnie outside, beckoning him to come play earlier in the night (When the driving section happened most likely) and the father gets pissed, showing this isn't the first time the kid has snuck off to "that place" (Hinted at being Freddy's).
Common arguments against this theory:
1) It's raining! The springlocks would've clamped shut!
It's raining when the father gets home. Not necessarily when the kidnap/luring happened.
2) But all the children vanished AT Freddy's! The newspaper clips said so!
The newspaper clips said two kids vanished at Freddy's specifically and three more cases were linked to it. Susie definitely vanished at Freddy's, as shown by Fruity Maze. Other kids could've been lured off the streets and led back to Freddy's where they were then killed.
3) But what about the grave?!
There's nothing saying that's definitely a grave. It could just be breaking ground for a construction project. It's a mound of dirt on the ground. Even if it is a grave, it could also just be the grave of Susie's dog as she would've been killed already ("I was the first, I have seen everything")
4) But the rain is the same as in Charlie's death scene!
Reused assets are a thing. Just because it's raining in both scenes does NOT mean it's definitely the same night. Again, Later That Night can just as easily be referring to later from the initial driving minigame.
5) Not being allowed into Jrs?
It's a bar. He's drunk. He's already been kicked out. The bouncer isn't going to let him back in.
Whether a person chooses to believe in this version is their own choice, I just feel it's the most narratively sound. And the biggest thing to remember is that FNAF isn't real life, it's a story. So whatever a person finds as the most narratively sound will be the best choice! The answer is gonna be what Scott deems as the most narratively sound, after all!
I really like this tbh, nice to compile the evidence in this way !
The chaos is strong with this one. This vid is so great you earn a sub
I wonder if Scott himself could even make a definitive timeline at this point
my thoughts are that charlotte died after MCI bc we know someone was caught and convicted for the MCI. i think the convicted person was Henry and that was the "wound first inflicted on me". Or at least it could be. This could be why the Security Puppet exists too maybe??? like he made it to protect Charlotte in his absence bc he knows that he didnt do it, so the only other explanation is William in his head. William somehow gets away with it (i rlly like DPTs idea that William lied to lump CC in with MCI so that they don't suspect him as the killer) and Henry is charged instead.
What if the first one who saw everything is exotic butter?
I've considered the idea that it goes Missing Children/Charlie -> Elizabeth -> Crying Child. Afton kills kids cause he's a serial killer -> he notices the possession and wants to experiment further for it so he builds the funtimes to specifically capture kids and get their remnant -> he verbally tells elizabeth to stay away but that's not enough and she gets got -> since a verbal warning wasn't enough, he then uses Psychic Friend Fred Bear to encourage Crying Child's fear of the animatronics to keep him away. Of course the biggest proof that this is Not True is that the Freddy that kills CC is supposedly Golden Freddy before he fell into disrepair. If the Missing Children were murdered first, Cassidy's body would already be inside, meaning the suit would not still be in active use performing on stage. Matter of fact, there would be no reason Fred Bear and Spring Bonnie would still be in use post creation of the Fnaf 1 animatronics
The problem is that the MCI happens in 1985 and crying child and Charlie die in 1983
@@RabbiB0Y Help wanted 2 strongly suggest Charlie dying after MCI
I don't like it but Charlie has to die after mci. The combination of grave orders chicka "I was the first" and inputing the right code to unlock the mask is pretty explicit. Not quite as it's me Michael cutscene but still. I like the grave in the woods being Elizabeth's. It makes much more sense as hiding evidence than being crying child grave.
just found this channel by this video and just scrolling down other videos you made i can tell youre gonna get thousands of subs soon
Here is the thing about dual process theorys order. They are not saying the bite of 83 is not separate from the mci. Cc could have been in a coma for two years and maybe even springlocked several time segments before the mci were discovered its only that he used that entire thing to cover up the desth of his son. And earn an alibi and frame henry. He lumped cc in with the mci when he was caught despite the bite being two years earlier and he had springlicked the kid at some point between that. (Or directly as it was happening.)
100% could be the case, though it does make the end of FNAF 4 feel a little odd as he's either not dying or the end takes place a while after the rest of the game. Loved a lot of their ideas in that video, just not 100% sold on all of it quite yet (though it feels like they're slowly winning me over on parts of it)
@@mt13industries here is the thing. The consensus does seem to be the main game takes place a lot longer away from the bite than the mci do. If it is not cc was moved to some test chamber after he recovered enough to walk. Everything is like a decade appart. So what is a few years and a violent flatline.
Although it does change the imagry of the scene. Imagine fredbear at the end of ucn and wiliam (or whoever) looking at that and saying i will put you back together. And whoever said we are still your friends just looking at him in agony.
Fnaf vr legit shows us susie dies first, whos chica by the way. You see its been implyed that william has killed others before and way way before as well. Plus blue prints are made to help build meaning yes baby was planned to kill kids. Plus babys pizza world wasnt made nor open around the time of freddy fazbears first opening. Also just because Elizabeth wasnt their in that room doesnt mean she isnt anywhere at all because shes dead. Plus just because the tv says 1983 doesnt mean it is 1983, it legit could be 1985 because lets be honest who would wait to get revenge for anything. But if golden freddy was able to speak to the crying child and be in the same suit what does that mean? That cassidy was already dead because we know golden freddy is 2 spirits. Hell even in the books its implyed the one who cant see at all who tortured a man from their memories died earlier.
What if what he saw was just the nightmares
Entirely possible, especially given its William saying "remember what you saw" and he's the one potentially responsible for the nightmares with the nightmare gas that is apparently a thing
My favorite part of FNAF theories is that everyone inevitably has to take a stance on whether they think the story is good. Because if we don’t know what the story is, then we don’t KNOW that it’s narratively satisfying or consistent with its own logic. It might be though!
Any story that's not immediately clear with its characters and their motivations isn't very good imo. But making an interesting setting in order to justify the atmosphere and gameplay is what FNAF really succeeds at doing. Obviously, the mystery is a huge part of that, plus the indie horror vibe is charming as well. My favourite tidbit of FNAF lore is the Cassidy image really being a pic of Scott's son with a filter on. I am also in the camp that Pizzeria Simulator and UCN were the perfect endings for the whole series, with the Glitchtrap stuff coming off as a cheap retcon to keep selling merch.
3:13 the reason why it's because baby wasn't supposed to kill but when Henry and William work together to create circus baby
Industrial errors have occurred that made circus baby a killer animatronic William Notice that something is wrong with circus baby so that why he told Elizabeth to stay away from her
and to prove my point if William created circus baby to kill kids why he told Elizabeth that he created her for her and why he told Elizabeth that he
*made her just for her*
Yknow what.
What if the mimic program was downloaded into Baby and that’s where she learned violence
us clearly
The only reason people think Elizabeth is the first dead kid is the stomach mouth on nightmare fredbear which like cc would have nightmares of Circus baby with a stomach mouth if she died first BUT cc couldn't have seen it because circus baby waited until it was only Elizabeth in the room before she killed Elizabeth.
Fredbear's stomach mouth can be explained by spring locks look at how the spring locks in the torso ook in the graphic novels and movie
My thoughts were Emily died first. Her dad saying he was the first could be the the first parent to lose a child?
you're a funny dude, please make more of these so i have more content to consume
this would kind of make sense here.. i dont know where elizabeth would fall but C.C. Must be first
Evan, Elizabeth, Charlie, "Gabriel, Jeremy, Susie, Fritz, Cassidy"
thats probably how it would go
and
FNaF 4, FNaF SL, FNaF 1, FNaF 3, FNaF 6.
Fnaf 2 doesnt count because it wasnt michael playing as the guard or any of the aftons
If we were to count fnaf 2
FNaF 4, FNaF SL, FNaF 2, FNaF 1, FNaF 3, FNaF 6.
"Logic doesn't apply to killing children" is a take that I really don't see enough in the FNaF theorizing community. Despite _every_ portrayal of Afton we have so far just positing that he's a madman who kills children for fun and seemingly finds a hobby out of neglecting, abusing, and even killing his own kids, people continue to try and position him as this tortured and grieving parent.
There’s also the fact that baby’s programming makes her check for the amount of children in the room and Elizabeth was the only one
Wait I’m confused. So the missing children’s incident happened in 1985, the kid got bit in 1983, why does the crying child go later again? I think I missed something.
What a banger vid, really good watch
Okay, tbh I've seen only 5 seconds so far, and I already love this guy's editing style. Show him some love, yall.
The praise is very much appreciated!
Im sorry but your points in the beginning are lines that happened before he was thinking of SL
I love FNaF and all but trying to figure out who dies first makes ME want to die by Willy Appleton😃😃😃
(I just want to know Scott😖😖)
CC or Elizabet was probably first i think "Chicka" tries to say they were the first of the Missing Children incidednt. And for Charlet it makes to much sense for her to die after CC and Elizabeth.
Edit: i belive CC was first then Charlet. If Molten MCU is true then Elizabeth dies last, i personally belive Eleziabet dies before MCI
I’m headcannoning your last Hail Mary.
Oh my god i just realized
FNAF SL would 100% come before fnaf 1.
the message: fired for foul odor smell
being that when michael was scooped, removing all his organs for ennard to climb inside, his body was rotting.. so thats why SL must come before fnaf 1.
Elizabeth is a character we can interact with in FNaF 4. She is alive by then.
Why is your gameplay so dark?
Originally intended for the gameplay to be more of a background so left it a bit darker, but also didn't want the screen to always be too busy. Editing is a big thing I'm working to improve right now so the feedback is much appreciated
New sub keep it up butter cup
This was an awesome video! I’ve got to say I was so excited during that final segment of the video. I’ve been making my own theories about the timeline and in the video I made a few months ago, I came to the same conclusion that Mrs. Afton is the first to die. It was the most exciting thing to hear another living soul say that. Cause I don’t think I’ve seen someone else talk about the security breach tapes being evidence for Mrs. Afton being first to die. My theory is kinda all over the place (as one might expect) but if you’re interested in hearing another theorist discuss that final idea and run with it for a full timeline video. Feel free to watch this video.
m.ruclips.net/video/3mTxibyB2HE/видео.html
😮😮😮😮😮😮
inchrestin.........