@@blueberryelf1150 Not the novels, certainly, the encyclopedia is another thing. It has some errors which makes it difficult to tell what's correct, but that doesn't mean the whole thing should be discarded.
The frustrated 'Editor's note 1' followed by an even more frustrated 'Editor's note Editor's note' was hilarious. Reminds me of (can't remember who) some fnaf theorizer saying "Chica was in the chicken" followed by "hi, youtuber here, just wanted to stop by and say I meant KITCHEN!!" all angrily. Love humor in editing.
Wild quality for such a small channel!! Loved the video. I've never seen anyone look at the encyclopedia like this, and haven't read it myself because of all the negative backlash, so this was refreshing. Keep it up!
I’m still trying to wrap my head around all that’s going on here since I’m not very clear on the game timeline but your video is rather well-made. I’m interested in what you have to show in your next video.
Sorry for comment spam, but I think a lot of the backlash came from the book outright confirming things that probably went against popular theories at the time. Like, seeing them say "Cassidy was the first" is as clear cut as you can get for confirmation of who was first, but people really like to cling to Chica's "I was the first" line.
loved the video, i was impressed with your theories and your points and checked your channel for more videos.. guess ill be waiting for em haha ❤️ and i loved how you gave some of em shortcut theory names
The quality for this video is better than some of the bigger fnaf channels i follow- seriously impressive essay/theory style video!! Excited to see the next few parts!!
Your remark about stage01being a camera-feed like cutscene promped me to remember a small theory I've had: Death minigames in FNaF 2 have those effects on them that look like lines, I've always thought they looked awfully like a CCTV footage What if... they are? What if they meant to show us the CCTV footage of MCI that have been used by police to convict William Afton as noted in the newspaper clippings in FNaF 1
I just want to say before I comment I’m not done with the video, but so far I love it. I agree with the encyclopedia being like completely disregarded because peoples theories don’t match up with what the encyclopedia says and I know that there’s a few errors. And that cannot be the case that the whole book is wrong and that’s it’s false info when it doesn’t match everyone’s narrative. Also, I like the idea of the one ret con being where the Fred bears family diner was especially with pizza simulator having such a strong image I feel like pizza simulator was trying to like send you home that like this is where Charlie died even with lefty being in that picture of the alley LEFTY WAS MADE TO CAPTURE THE PUPPET. That for me was like damn I really think that this could be there at, because it went unnoticed and I feel like there’s a good chance of it being the true retcon. I also just want to share some love I love watching fnaf theories even if I don’t completely agree with the theorizer I still love hearing a different perspective. It’s just crazy to me, though how some terrorizer’s get hate over their theories. I truly so far think you’ve nailed it and can’t wait for part two ❤
Good thing I looked in comments before saying the same thing as you. Also: Old man consequences is in ucn, which is regarded as canon Vanny mask from ruin working in a similar way to flipside (entering an abstract world which let's you teleport around in the "real" world) The creator of games in fnaf world fitting in with the Scott lookalike from help wanted.
This is a great theory video. I've felt the Funtimes were much earlier for several reasons for awhile. IMO CC and Charlie died early in 1983 (most likely spring) not too far apart. Afton noticed the Puppet being possessed, and possibly CC with Fredbear, which led to discovering Remenant and building the Funtimes later that same year. Loved some of your finds here.
But Michael IS The Playable Character Of Fnaf1 In FNAF 4 The Nightmare Area And The Animatronics Movements/Patrons Are Based On FNAF1 There's The Fact That Michael Drawn Nightmare Fredbear In The Book And Also That You Can Hear Phone-Guy's Call On FNAF4, Meaning That Whoever Is Having The Nightmare Heared Them Before In Some Point (FNAF1 Protag) And That 'Whoever' Might Be Michael As The Afrorementioned Nightmare Fredbear Drawing FNAF4 Protag = Michael (The Drawing) FNAF1 Protag = FNAF4 Protag (Phone Guy's Calls) Therefore FNAF1 Protag = Michael (He Had Nightmares After Working In FNAF)
Dude i loved this video! This was awesome, I would love to talk FNAF with you, I am in the stages of making a horror analyzed video on Springtrap would love your feedback!
The book also calls Bon-Bon a girl but then says that Bonnet is the first girl Bonnie. It also says Bon-Bon shows up in Fnaf 3 and Nightmare Foxy is in UCN.
Fall Fest '83 is more important then I think people caught on with the DLC. I think there's a reason the coins are '83, it's the bite of '83 and there's a fall fest that then is advertised in that same year. I think Dread Bear's minigame depicts something that happened and is then, in the style of Help Wanted, is being lamp shaded as "ha ha what a silly story!". Dreadbear's minigame is all about taking a brain and experimenting on it until it is ready to be put into the robot mascot of Dreadbear... Which sounds a lot like and is a similar color to Fredbear (not brown like Freddy). I really wonder if this is to call out what happened to one of the victims. There are two names we (the fandom) associate with a yellow bear; a yellow bear who never physically shows up in the gameplay sections, but whom we know exists in the game world somewhere. I wonder if Dreadbear is actually what happened to the Crying Child, who we know died earlier that same year as the Fall Fest mentioned. I'd like to point out Foxybro's skin color and how it changes; Foxybro is first a pale color, then a tan color. I think this might be a "visual shorthand" for conveying the passage of time. What if the color change is to denote that the children are both in school, but then they get out of school for the summer, before the birthday? I know people's skin does not tan that quickly, but I wonder if the abrupt change isn't meant to be realistic, just to act as a clear call out to say; the bite of '83 happened around the same time children in America are let out for summer vacation. This would then place the Bite before fall fest, otherwise we would not know which came first and only that it was within the same year. The fact the Crying Child's head was damaged and Dreadbear is about messing with a brain I think that further connects them; why have a game about putting a human brain into an animatronic, when the "goal" was to "make light" of the negative rumors around fazbear? Unless... Dreadbear's minigame isn't random, but a Frankenstein-themed lamp shade of a real event.
This is super interesting, new takes like this that actually use primary evidence are so refreshing. This goes well with Alena Baker's theory about Fredbear's hat color indicating a reopening of Fredbear's by Afton, thus why he wears purple in fnaf4.
I think the "one retcon" is charlie's gender in take cake minigame, the words say "save him", so it was a boy to be reconed to a girl in pizza sim i think
18:39 Wasnt that freddy from take cake minigame actually freddy? I mean, he's the same colour as the freddy sprite mask in give gifts give life, and the size of the bulding doesnt matter, if the size matter, foxy gogogo is not freddy's because its just one room
Has anybody ever considered that 4 could just be like a special case of where they rented out the animatronic to one house and they had illusion disks in they house or something.
One thing I wanted to say about the security log book and Micheal being the guy from fnaf 1 In the book there's nightmare fredbear drawn my Michael and because he might be the one experiencing it either enduced from his brother or as a dream the gameplay is way to similar to fnaf 1 to be just be a coincidence so the protag of fnaf 4 needs some experience from fnaf 1 so Micheal would make sense
Also…..If we take a look at the crying child and the fact that it says his only game appearance is FNAF 4….if it was approved by Scott….I think that’s most likely saying that the child that we give the cake in Happiest Day is NOT Crying Child.
According to this book, Helpy is the most hated character in the fandom, and is also very creepy. I still can’t get over how this book doesn’t have a page for either Mike or Micheal, let alone all of the inaccuracies. Why does it show book Charlie when talking about game Charlie? Why doesn’t it specify that Charlie is both Henry’s daughter and also the Puppet? Why does it name drop Elizabeth on Henry’s page, but not his daughter? Why in gods name does Twisted Chica have a page? She doesn’t even exist within the story, she only exists in merch or as concept art, she gets a page but Micheal Afton doesn’t? This book is something people have to pay for, so why is it so low quality when compared to the free wiki? You have to buy this, pay actual money, it should be of some level of quality. It’s almost as if whoever wrote the book didn’t know what they were writing about and just copy pasted the dialogue or events within the cutscenes of the games. And considering what was revealed in the 10th anniversary Dawko interview, it makes sense why it’s so low quality, since Scott has been hands off when it comes to the books, he mostly just gives them clip notes to work off of and it’s not too different when it comes to the games. It’s only after the release of Security Breach where he realized that by doing that the quality of the products began to suffer, so ever since Help Wanted 2/Ruin he’s been more hands on again. Reminds me a bit of what Akira Toriyama did with Dragon Ball for a while, and especially when it came to Super.
Much of this seems pretty well supported, but my issue with there being three separate "batches" of murdered kids is that the story insists on only talking about one of them. Why would there be so much emphasis on these five (+2) kids if there were ten others out there? The funtimes being built before the bite of '83 also seems so unlikely that it needs more supporting evidence. The "claw mechanisms" and the ability to hide things inside them could just be referring to the springlock suits.
You said there was no reference to fnaf 1 in the survival logbook but Mike draws nightmare and the night 1 phonecall from fnaf 1 plays during fnaf 4 so there definitely is.
There's a few issues here, like the Funtimes being made in 1983, when their blueprints call out them being able to lure and kidnap children to produce Remnant, which Afton wouldn't know of until 1985, his first kill spree, and there being 3 versions of the MCI which is just wrong. The FNAF 2 location closed likely because of financial problems, or remodeling, and with everything viewed in the location, that can't be done in a short amount of time. Plus, while the Withereds aren't the originals, they technically still are to a degree. The spirits of the MCI who haunted the Withereds, haunted the originals once the place opened, and with haunted robots and people losing interest , the building likely shut down because of a drop in profit, a major one, and the place had to be shut down.
Sorry for the long reply, a lot to go over. My main argument in the video for the placement of the Funtimes was that they had to actually predate 1983, as the FazFact from FNaF AR heavily implies that Baby was one of the earlier suits designed by Afton. This is backed up by something that I forgot to mention in the video, that being when Baby mentions that the springlock suit in Sister Location was originally going to be used at her original location, meaning that the Funtimes predate the removal of the springlock suits. While Afton being familiar with remnant by this point would be strange, the evidence supports that these animatronics at least existed in some form prior to the FNaF 2 location opening. Also, according to the timeline in the video, regardless of the reason the FNaF 2 location closed initially, there would still be 4 years for any changes to the establishment to be made. In fact, one point that I considered making, but left out due to feeling it was weak, was that the layout of the building changes from SAVE THEM to FNaF 2's gameplay, implying some remodeling, such as the relocation of the main stage and Puppet box to the same room. As for the Withereds, I don't see any evidence for the spirits leaving one set of animatronics and going to another. The simplest solution that breaks the least amount of existing story elements is for there to be three sets of murders. We know that the Withereds and the Originals are two different sets of animatronics, so in order for what you are saying to be true, the spirits would somehow have to leave the Originals prior to 1987, enter the Withereds, and then leave to go back into the Originals before FNaF 1, which we never see any evidence of them being able to do.
@@sodal3 yes, the Withereds aren't the originals, but the spirits would move because of a particular thing called Remnant. Or some parts of the Withereds were used in creating the originals, as that is what pretty much everyone accepts, and is implied by the games. They never mention anything about the Withereds aside from keeping them, and the Withered Foxy forearm and hook, but there's also the Puppet's mask on a wall in Fazbear's Fright, and the Puppet returns as Lefty in FFPS, so it wouldn't make sense for that to be the same mask. There's also nothing hinting or even backing up the idea of a 3rd murder set, as the Originals and Withereds are practically the same. Children's spirits attached to the Withereds, FNAF 2 location closes, animatronics are replaced, because of the kids connection to the Withereds, it's not difficult to see them possessing the Originals.
@@Scar-Predator I get where you're coming from on the idea of the remnant, but unless they moved pieces of the Withereds from the FNaF 2 location to the FNaF 1 location for spare parts, that can't happen. We are only ever told that the FNaF 2 location is using them for parts. Meanwhile, the FNaF 1 location is shown to already be existing in the "End of Night Hallucinations", meaning that the Originals are already built. While you are right about Lefty, we know from the Phone Dude that not everything in the building is authentic. That said, the box of FNaF 2 memorabilia is likely to be the real deal, due to us knowing that all of the items in that box came from the same location. This is backed up by two of the other Puppet Pals occasionally appearing on the walls. The biggest evidence for a third set of murders for the Withereds comes from the SAVE THEM minigame taking place in 1983, predating the MCI in 1985. We know that the Withereds were already possessed prior to the FNaF 2 location opening.
One thing people forget that is Afton could have realized the Puppet was possessed by Charlie and learned of remenant that way. There is no reason why it had to be the MCI possessions specifically. Since, Charlie most likely died in 1983 it wouldn't be out of the ordinary that later that same year he began building the Funtimes. Also, if we are correct that CC is possessing Golden Freddy then that might be another reason for Afton noticing possession leading him to remnant and we know for sure he died in 1983.
The Encyclopedia is correct people are just made that there wrong. like how they think bon bons a boy even though she isnt and never was. or how the crying child doesnt have a real name.
Man i need to give yall my headcannon it would drive yall wild all the lose ends are tied up and im jusy ready for the next game! SOMEONE GO back to curse of Dreadbear please! It seems like them damn Halloween variants are much more important now
This is barely related to the subject of this video, but why do you say FNAF world is largely non-canon? There's no indication of this that I know of, and in fact Scott's comments about it seem to reinforce that, while he doesn't love how that game came out, it is still canon
At the time, I'd thought it wasn't canon. Atm, I have almost the complete opposite opinion on it and think that it potentially explains many aspects of the current era; actually currently working on a script for a video on that topic.
here's the thing, although i personally don't agree with the vast majority of this theory, i would also like to mention that matpat hasn't been a reliable lore source for like half a decade
![[FNaF Theory] Defending the Character Encyclopedia - Part 2](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bH5CAZ1LwIU/mqdefault.jpg)
![[FNaF Theory] Defending the Character Encyclopedia - Part 2](/img/tr.png)
![[FNaF Theory] What's the deal with Dittophobia?](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/npJGIUYmUDA/mqdefault.jpg)
It's funny that the people who refuse to use this book, are the same people who takes Tales as gospel
And accuse Scott of being inconsistent and retconning whenever certain theories are criticized.
@vanyadolly I have read all the books and their are way to many things that rase alarm bells for me to think they are in the games continuity
@@blueberryelf1150 Not the novels, certainly, the encyclopedia is another thing. It has some errors which makes it difficult to tell what's correct, but that doesn't mean the whole thing should be discarded.
sick valentine pfp!
Because Tales are canon. They're happening in game timeline. Encyclopedia is shit made by some fan I guess
The frustrated 'Editor's note 1' followed by an even more frustrated 'Editor's note Editor's note' was hilarious. Reminds me of (can't remember who) some fnaf theorizer saying "Chica was in the chicken" followed by "hi, youtuber here, just wanted to stop by and say I meant KITCHEN!!" all angrily. Love humor in editing.
Wild quality for such a small channel!! Loved the video. I've never seen anyone look at the encyclopedia like this, and haven't read it myself because of all the negative backlash, so this was refreshing. Keep it up!
I’m still trying to wrap my head around all that’s going on here since I’m not very clear on the game timeline but your video is rather well-made. I’m interested in what you have to show in your next video.
May I direct you to GiBis GoodBad 8 hour timeline video?
Sorry for comment spam, but I think a lot of the backlash came from the book outright confirming things that probably went against popular theories at the time. Like, seeing them say "Cassidy was the first" is as clear cut as you can get for confirmation of who was first, but people really like to cling to Chica's "I was the first" line.
loved the video, i was impressed with your theories and your points and checked your channel for more videos.. guess ill be waiting for em haha ❤️ and i loved how you gave some of em shortcut theory names
I didn't know people assumed the Withereds were the FNAF 1 animatronics.
The quality for this video is better than some of the bigger fnaf channels i follow- seriously impressive essay/theory style video!! Excited to see the next few parts!!
Your remark about stage01being a camera-feed like cutscene promped me to remember a small theory I've had:
Death minigames in FNaF 2 have those effects on them that look like lines, I've always thought they looked awfully like a CCTV footage
What if... they are? What if they meant to show us the CCTV footage of MCI that have been used by police to convict William Afton as noted in the newspaper clippings in FNaF 1
In Curse of Dreadbear's Pirate Ride minigame, you go *though the FNAF2 location* in the secret tracks, which also features the Jack-O's.
I just want to say before I comment I’m not done with the video, but so far I love it. I agree with the encyclopedia being like completely disregarded because peoples theories don’t match up with what the encyclopedia says and I know that there’s a few errors. And that cannot be the case that the whole book is wrong and that’s it’s false info when it doesn’t match everyone’s narrative. Also, I like the idea of the one ret con being where the Fred bears family diner was especially with pizza simulator having such a strong image I feel like pizza simulator was trying to like send you home that like this is where Charlie died even with lefty being in that picture of the alley LEFTY WAS MADE TO CAPTURE THE PUPPET. That for me was like damn I really think that this could be there at, because it went unnoticed and I feel like there’s a good chance of it being the true retcon. I also just want to share some love I love watching fnaf theories even if I don’t completely agree with the theorizer I still love hearing a different perspective. It’s just crazy to me, though how some terrorizer’s get hate over their theories. I truly so far think you’ve nailed it and can’t wait for part two ❤
23:16
What you mean fnaf world is largely uncannon
It ties into a bunch from fnaf 3, ultimate custom night and even ruin
So why would it be noncanon?
Good thing I looked in comments before saying the same thing as you. Also:
Old man consequences is in ucn, which is regarded as canon
Vanny mask from ruin working in a similar way to flipside (entering an abstract world which let's you teleport around in the "real" world)
The creator of games in fnaf world fitting in with the Scott lookalike from help wanted.
This is a great theory video. I've felt the Funtimes were much earlier for several reasons for awhile. IMO CC and Charlie died early in 1983 (most likely spring) not too far apart. Afton noticed the Puppet being possessed, and possibly CC with Fredbear, which led to discovering Remenant and building the Funtimes later that same year. Loved some of your finds here.
But Michael IS The Playable Character Of Fnaf1
In FNAF 4 The Nightmare Area And The Animatronics Movements/Patrons Are Based On FNAF1
There's The Fact That Michael Drawn Nightmare Fredbear In The Book And Also That You Can Hear Phone-Guy's Call On FNAF4, Meaning That Whoever Is Having The Nightmare Heared Them Before In Some Point (FNAF1 Protag) And That 'Whoever' Might Be Michael As The Afrorementioned Nightmare Fredbear Drawing
FNAF4 Protag = Michael (The Drawing)
FNAF1 Protag = FNAF4 Protag (Phone Guy's Calls)
Therefore
FNAF1 Protag = Michael (He Had Nightmares After Working In FNAF)
Dude i loved this video! This was awesome, I would love to talk FNAF with you, I am in the stages of making a horror analyzed video on Springtrap would love your feedback!
The book also calls Bon-Bon a girl but then says that Bonnet is the first girl Bonnie. It also says Bon-Bon shows up in Fnaf 3 and Nightmare Foxy is in UCN.
Fall Fest '83 is more important then I think people caught on with the DLC. I think there's a reason the coins are '83, it's the bite of '83 and there's a fall fest that then is advertised in that same year. I think Dread Bear's minigame depicts something that happened and is then, in the style of Help Wanted, is being lamp shaded as "ha ha what a silly story!". Dreadbear's minigame is all about taking a brain and experimenting on it until it is ready to be put into the robot mascot of Dreadbear... Which sounds a lot like and is a similar color to Fredbear (not brown like Freddy). I really wonder if this is to call out what happened to one of the victims. There are two names we (the fandom) associate with a yellow bear; a yellow bear who never physically shows up in the gameplay sections, but whom we know exists in the game world somewhere.
I wonder if Dreadbear is actually what happened to the Crying Child, who we know died earlier that same year as the Fall Fest mentioned. I'd like to point out Foxybro's skin color and how it changes; Foxybro is first a pale color, then a tan color. I think this might be a "visual shorthand" for conveying the passage of time. What if the color change is to denote that the children are both in school, but then they get out of school for the summer, before the birthday? I know people's skin does not tan that quickly, but I wonder if the abrupt change isn't meant to be realistic, just to act as a clear call out to say; the bite of '83 happened around the same time children in America are let out for summer vacation. This would then place the Bite before fall fest, otherwise we would not know which came first and only that it was within the same year. The fact the Crying Child's head was damaged and Dreadbear is about messing with a brain I think that further connects them; why have a game about putting a human brain into an animatronic, when the "goal" was to "make light" of the negative rumors around fazbear? Unless... Dreadbear's minigame isn't random, but a Frankenstein-themed lamp shade of a real event.
Great breakdown of the FNaF character encyclopedia your video says a lot with so little keep up the great work.
This is super interesting, new takes like this that actually use primary evidence are so refreshing. This goes well with Alena Baker's theory about Fredbear's hat color indicating a reopening of Fredbear's by Afton, thus why he wears purple in fnaf4.
I think the "one retcon" is charlie's gender in take cake minigame, the words say "save him", so it was a boy to be reconed to a girl in pizza sim i think
This Retcon thing is too confusing
18:39
Wasnt that freddy from take cake minigame actually freddy? I mean, he's the same colour as the freddy sprite mask in give gifts give life, and the size of the bulding doesnt matter, if the size matter, foxy gogogo is not freddy's because its just one room
I really enjoyed the video
Has anybody ever considered that 4 could just be like a special case of where they rented out the animatronic to one house and they had illusion disks in they house or something.
One thing I wanted to say about the security log book and Micheal being the guy from fnaf 1
In the book there's nightmare fredbear drawn my Michael and because he might be the one experiencing it either enduced from his brother or as a dream the gameplay is way to similar to fnaf 1 to be just be a coincidence so the protag of fnaf 4 needs some experience from fnaf 1 so Micheal would make sense
But it's a really good video :3
He’s experiencing his brother’s dreams because of remnant
Also…..If we take a look at the crying child and the fact that it says his only game appearance is FNAF 4….if it was approved by Scott….I think that’s most likely saying that the child that we give the cake in Happiest Day is NOT Crying Child.
According to this book, Helpy is the most hated character in the fandom, and is also very creepy.
I still can’t get over how this book doesn’t have a page for either Mike or Micheal, let alone all of the inaccuracies. Why does it show book Charlie when talking about game Charlie? Why doesn’t it specify that Charlie is both Henry’s daughter and also the Puppet? Why does it name drop Elizabeth on Henry’s page, but not his daughter?
Why in gods name does Twisted Chica have a page? She doesn’t even exist within the story, she only exists in merch or as concept art, she gets a page but Micheal Afton doesn’t?
This book is something people have to pay for, so why is it so low quality when compared to the free wiki? You have to buy this, pay actual money, it should be of some level of quality. It’s almost as if whoever wrote the book didn’t know what they were writing about and just copy pasted the dialogue or events within the cutscenes of the games.
And considering what was revealed in the 10th anniversary Dawko interview, it makes sense why it’s so low quality, since Scott has been hands off when it comes to the books, he mostly just gives them clip notes to work off of and it’s not too different when it comes to the games. It’s only after the release of Security Breach where he realized that by doing that the quality of the products began to suffer, so ever since Help Wanted 2/Ruin he’s been more hands on again. Reminds me a bit of what Akira Toriyama did with Dragon Ball for a while, and especially when it came to Super.
Much of this seems pretty well supported, but my issue with there being three separate "batches" of murdered kids is that the story insists on only talking about one of them. Why would there be so much emphasis on these five (+2) kids if there were ten others out there?
The funtimes being built before the bite of '83 also seems so unlikely that it needs more supporting evidence. The "claw mechanisms" and the ability to hide things inside them could just be referring to the springlock suits.
You said there was no reference to fnaf 1 in the survival logbook but Mike draws nightmare and the night 1 phonecall from fnaf 1 plays during fnaf 4 so there definitely is.
Also a god damned Loonatics reference? In a Fnaf video? Subbed.
The best video on youtube
There's a few issues here, like the Funtimes being made in 1983, when their blueprints call out them being able to lure and kidnap children to produce Remnant, which Afton wouldn't know of until 1985, his first kill spree, and there being 3 versions of the MCI which is just wrong. The FNAF 2 location closed likely because of financial problems, or remodeling, and with everything viewed in the location, that can't be done in a short amount of time. Plus, while the Withereds aren't the originals, they technically still are to a degree. The spirits of the MCI who haunted the Withereds, haunted the originals once the place opened, and with haunted robots and people losing interest , the building likely shut down because of a drop in profit, a major one, and the place had to be shut down.
Sorry for the long reply, a lot to go over.
My main argument in the video for the placement of the Funtimes was that they had to actually predate 1983, as the FazFact from FNaF AR heavily implies that Baby was one of the earlier suits designed by Afton. This is backed up by something that I forgot to mention in the video, that being when Baby mentions that the springlock suit in Sister Location was originally going to be used at her original location, meaning that the Funtimes predate the removal of the springlock suits. While Afton being familiar with remnant by this point would be strange, the evidence supports that these animatronics at least existed in some form prior to the FNaF 2 location opening.
Also, according to the timeline in the video, regardless of the reason the FNaF 2 location closed initially, there would still be 4 years for any changes to the establishment to be made. In fact, one point that I considered making, but left out due to feeling it was weak, was that the layout of the building changes from SAVE THEM to FNaF 2's gameplay, implying some remodeling, such as the relocation of the main stage and Puppet box to the same room.
As for the Withereds, I don't see any evidence for the spirits leaving one set of animatronics and going to another. The simplest solution that breaks the least amount of existing story elements is for there to be three sets of murders. We know that the Withereds and the Originals are two different sets of animatronics, so in order for what you are saying to be true, the spirits would somehow have to leave the Originals prior to 1987, enter the Withereds, and then leave to go back into the Originals before FNaF 1, which we never see any evidence of them being able to do.
@@sodal3 yes, the Withereds aren't the originals, but the spirits would move because of a particular thing called Remnant. Or some parts of the Withereds were used in creating the originals, as that is what pretty much everyone accepts, and is implied by the games. They never mention anything about the Withereds aside from keeping them, and the Withered Foxy forearm and hook, but there's also the Puppet's mask on a wall in Fazbear's Fright, and the Puppet returns as Lefty in FFPS, so it wouldn't make sense for that to be the same mask. There's also nothing hinting or even backing up the idea of a 3rd murder set, as the Originals and Withereds are practically the same. Children's spirits attached to the Withereds, FNAF 2 location closes, animatronics are replaced, because of the kids connection to the Withereds, it's not difficult to see them possessing the Originals.
@@Scar-Predator I get where you're coming from on the idea of the remnant, but unless they moved pieces of the Withereds from the FNaF 2 location to the FNaF 1 location for spare parts, that can't happen. We are only ever told that the FNaF 2 location is using them for parts.
Meanwhile, the FNaF 1 location is shown to already be existing in the "End of Night Hallucinations", meaning that the Originals are already built.
While you are right about Lefty, we know from the Phone Dude that not everything in the building is authentic. That said, the box of FNaF 2 memorabilia is likely to be the real deal, due to us knowing that all of the items in that box came from the same location. This is backed up by two of the other Puppet Pals occasionally appearing on the walls.
The biggest evidence for a third set of murders for the Withereds comes from the SAVE THEM minigame taking place in 1983, predating the MCI in 1985. We know that the Withereds were already possessed prior to the FNaF 2 location opening.
@@sodal3Just watch game theory
One thing people forget that is Afton could have realized the Puppet was possessed by Charlie and learned of remenant that way. There is no reason why it had to be the MCI possessions specifically. Since, Charlie most likely died in 1983 it wouldn't be out of the ordinary that later that same year he began building the Funtimes. Also, if we are correct that CC is possessing Golden Freddy then that might be another reason for Afton noticing possession leading him to remnant and we know for sure he died in 1983.
Part 2 please
Part 2 is now out
Lol
The Encyclopedia is correct people are just made that there wrong. like how they think bon bons a boy even though she isnt and never was. or how the crying child doesnt have a real name.
Bruh
@@muriloilharodrigues4724 your just mad
your withered argument isnt right at all but the Encyclopedia is correct that statement is true.
Man i need to give yall my headcannon it would drive yall wild all the lose ends are tied up and im jusy ready for the next game! SOMEONE GO back to curse of Dreadbear please! It seems like them damn Halloween variants are much more important now
Massive video length, haha, I watch spiffs 16 hour streams
5:45 well this didn't age well
This is barely related to the subject of this video, but why do you say FNAF world is largely non-canon? There's no indication of this that I know of, and in fact Scott's comments about it seem to reinforce that, while he doesn't love how that game came out, it is still canon
At the time, I'd thought it wasn't canon.
Atm, I have almost the complete opposite opinion on it and think that it potentially explains many aspects of the current era; actually currently working on a script for a video on that topic.
Good stuff
Bro wth only 68 subs?
This is why you’re a small channel 💀
Here's a thing watch game theory it is much more reliable
No.
Ijbol
@@moro346 Face Dfabd Egac DFAC
Cegc.
here's the thing, although i personally don't agree with the vast majority of this theory, i would also like to mention that matpat hasn't been a reliable lore source for like half a decade
@@goblintootsies Bro watched food and film theory instead of game theory.