Great video man! And honestly good point about a lot of the details in FNAF being bluff bait. Like you said, the more details you add at the beginning for no reason, the more you can pull from later on in the franchise and make it seem like you had it planned all along. I see that a lot in FNAF storytelling.
The problem is that sometimes these things aren’t explained, or the explanation makes no sense considering the previous lore, and it’s all a complete mess.
Another thing to note is if this was an abusive household there's no way the brother would tell off the drunken father. Like that's just a beating waiting to happen.
@@bonD6002 even still mental abuse breaks down people's ability to stand up to others, especially authority figures. May not be a physical beating but it'd still be gas lighting or being overly controlling or just shouting at them like he did at the door. Kids are tiny guy twice your size shouts down at you that'd make you shit bricks, I should know lol.
In an abusive household, would a mother be able to tell off the drunken father? Maybe mike could stand a tiny chance, him being close to an adult soon, perhaps?
@@gdeveloper3309 I mean then there's commonly domestic abuse, constant screaming, pushing eachother until one backs down or escalates. And well the Afton mother left so she clearly wasn't one to back down and take it but not strong enough to stand up and kick him out of her family's life. Honestly talking bout this is bringing back memories so ima stop. It's really not a fun situation being perfectly honest.
Oh my god, it was a minor part, but you completely blew my mind away by saying "Afton killed charlie because he blames Henry for Fredbear killing his son". It completely solves the problem of why he went from "son died" to "let's murder"
Could also explain why Afton kills even more kids. He simply snaps in grief. His son dies, then he kills Charlie for revenge, and at that point, he's psychotic and just starts killing random kids because if he can't have his kid, then nobody else should enjoy their kids either in some twisted logic of an insane person. Meanwhile, he's doing experiments with infusing souls into animatronics in some effort to bring his son back or somesuch. It's a much better explanation than "MUWAHAHAHA I'M EVIL FOR NO REASON!"
@@Dhalin Charlie is well implied to die first before CC so his killing didn’t start from grief. There’s still a possibility for mci83 we know from fnaf4 they were killed before CC. Not to mention there’s theories that CC was revived or rebuilt. (MikeBro, mci85 and mci83 are all theories too) Not to mention in the books his only child was Elizabeth who died in 1985-87 in it. He killed Charlie in 83. And the missing kids before Elizabeth died. However the reason he killed the kids according to the books was for immorality. Its also said in the books he is highly jealous of Henry. Police finding papers he wrote about his hatred to near worship of Henry. Anger, jealousy, envy can lead to make one do things they wouldn’t do anytime else.
Honestly best explanation for this minigame my only problem is the fact that Nightmare Fredbear clearly has four toes and the animatronic footprints have three toes but I can easily clear this up by saying Crying Child possessing Golden Freddy made those footprints and his been stalking Micheal ever since Mike killed him.
@@TheGloopOfMobius no it doenst, it's me means nothing, it's said by all the aminitronics and Mike says they ment to talk to William when they said that
I think that Scott writes with loose ideas and then when people get confused about certain parts or a big interest is generated in a particular character he just expands on those ideas and changes things to fit. It works because it's so loose. Kind of reminds me of a d&d game almost. The problem though is after a while it becomes harder and harder to stack those loose ideas and course correct because the narrative inevitably becomes very convoluted and harder to keep track of.
Great point but I personally think scott just does things and we the fans theorize about it and make the story for him and he goes with what we say makes the most sense lol 😂
@@kingnathannn207 That's a common view, but it really doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Every game brought something new that literally nobody thought of because he made it up on his own. Nobody theorized a puppet giving life to the animatronics before 2, nobody saw the killer getting springlocked coming before 3 (especially since 1 implied he'd been caught), nobody saw the absolute continuity clustercrap that was 4 coming, lol. And certainly nobody expected what SL brought to the table. All in all, I'd say that if Scott went with what the fans said... the series would probably make a lot more sense and ended a lot earlier. Oh, and he'd have shown us the damn Bite of 87 by now. But he's always done his own thing.
@@kingnathannn207 I thought that at first too but as time went on it seemed more like he was just retroactively changing things to fit. There's a lot of things that it's clear he went with in terms of theories like William Afton and such, but there's also plenty of other stuff that looks deliberate that wasn't thought up by the fans that made me think it was more like a choose your own adventure sort of thing.
I dont think matpat ever said that ballora IS the mom, as far as I remember he said she represents the mom, William made her like that because he misses his wife, not that she died and possessed ballora because she didnt
This was actually a bit of a recording fluke funny enough. The actual line was “Adjacent to Ballora” but the take I ended up using said “is ballora” which was my bad.
As much as I thought FNAF:SB was a hodgepodge of everything and nothing at the same time, it does give some footing for the Ballora is Ms. Afton or at least represents Ms. Afton theory, since there was that one party room that’s known as “the Afton Room” (the 5 bots at the table, each representing a member of the Afton Family, and one of them looks like Ballora).
The couch character saying "he's had a hard day" being the brother after he was the one MAKING the child cry was literally my biggest annoyance in any theory about this game. Thank you lolol
@@TheSoulCalledZuziait's annoying because it makes no sense for Michael to say, the minigame takes place at night, most likely after Michael has bullied CC enough for the day (which he does EVERYDAY). empathizing with CC right after a day of tormenting the little guy does not seem like something Michael would do at all, he's exclusively shown to be a bully and only changes after the Bite of 83. also, him saying this before he would bully CC for the day/night or before his first instance of bullying makes no sense for the same reason I just stated; there's no good evidence that states Michael was anything but a bully for the time we know him before CC gets bitten.
When I first saw this cutscene, I couldn't reason out who that person on the couch was, but I thought it was always talking about Michael running off to that place. I was actually confused by a theory that suggested it was the crying child, because, like you said here, breaking his window and running away isn't really the crying child's MO, but seemed to align well with a semi-aggressive teenager.
This makes total sense! Also a side note: Why would William drink if his life is presumably going well? It’s because he just lost his youngest son not too long ago. He begins to drink and lash out at Micheal because William claims that it’s Micheal’s fault (which I don’t blame him for that, Micheal was kinda the guy throwing him into the ol’ chomper.). William, in a drunken rage over his son’s death and possible hatred for the company, since it was the robots that the company made that did his son in, kills a child outside of Fredbear’s to either take out his rage on another child without being caught, or to experiment with bringing people back to life.
Another thing is maybe he also blamed Henry for building Fredbear and indirectly causing CC's death. He knew Henry cared about Charlie so he in a drunken rage decided to take revenge against him.
Another thing is maybe he also blamed Henry for building Fredbear and indirectly causing CC's death. He knew Henry cared about Charlie so he in a drunken rage decided to take revenge against him.
Yeah, gonna note it ABSOLUTELY cant be experimentation with Remnant. Unless CC was possessing shit (and i suspect it isnt, as he needs to be "guided" by the Puppet it seems?), the first encounter would be AFTER Charlie's own death and possession of the Puppet.
Dude, this is some absolutely AWESOME explanation to why Michael is the one who runs away in MN, the Crying Child response to scary things, the Nightmare Fred bear being an illusion, not a nightmare, the detail of Michael and his friends being shocked and not the scene just freezing, Michael having a rough day because it was the day of CC funeral, this observation of things being meaningless in earlier games and being brought back in important ways and the video was so complete and full of information that I thought the video was ending at 2 minutes lol, like, I have so much things to praise but I have very poor memory. Also the Burying Location joke was very funny to me and the observation of the final scene in FNAF World was very interesting, that's it I guess, great video! You deveres so much more
This theory does really work! There might also be an explanation as to why do Michael and Mrs. Afton have the similar text colors. What I think is that it represents Michael being more alike his mother personality-wise. He might physically look more like his father William Afton but his character is very different from William's, which can be explained by that Mrs. Afton was the one to take care of him most of his childhood. The fact that Michael feels strong guilt about what he did to his younger brother also might prove that because if Michael's personality was also much alike William's he'd have never felt that much guilt, strong enough for him to go out of his way to break the window just to visit his brother's grave. While Michael feels guilt about what he did, William doesn't feel anything about him killing Charlie which would then lead to him go after the other children as well. It also seems like she might've died rather than divorced, judging by that she has no hair in the midnight motorist cutscene and I think it's a common knowledge about what kind of disease would make a person go bald. Michael retains his mother's personality after Mrs. Afton passing away which can be seen by him in the later games as he goes to find Elizabeth Afton as baby, as he sits through the night shifts in the restaurants while supposedly trying to solve the crimes because not only he wants to make up for his mistake but also fix what his father did. In the end even if we take the theory that Glamrock Freddy in Security Breach represents the soul of Michael Afton for granted we may see how much caring he is about Gregory, being like a caring parent to that boy which Mrs. Afton really was as well to her own children and to Michael in particular. That may work even more perfectly if we consider Vanessa representing Elizabeth's soul, and if William was the one to take care of her in her childhood before she was kilked by Baby that would've made her being much like William personality-wise while supposedly being more like her mother in appearance.
Now I also think that the TV show from Sistet Location makes even more sense with that. Dracula keeps saying that the "Baby isn't mine", a baby who's literally a vampire just like Dracula. Just like William refusing to see in Michael his own son despite him having the same physical appearance.
Someone made a theory on reddit that Immortal And The Restless is actually about William Vs Michael. Their examples being Michael relating to Clara in SLB Immortal = William Restless = Michael The baby represents the murdered kids. Clara constantly needling Vlad to take care of baby = William needing to take responsibility for the murders. Vlad denying the baby is his = William denying him killing despite its obvious he’s the one who did it. The nursery and working the graveyard shift, that his pay will be docked = Police spending a week investigating to find out what happened to SAVE THEM kids. William worked likely as a night guard in fnaf2. That he’s either going to get fired or leaving job when the murders are discovered. Clara lighting house on fire = Fnaf3 fire
There's one issue with this theory. Why did Michael bully the crying child to begin with if he had the kind personality of Mrs Afton? That doesn't make sense. A person with a kind loving personality wouldn't bully their little sibling or pick on them. So if Mrs Afton was so loving to Michael and Michael inherited that, then why was he mean to crying child in FNAF 4 then? Doesn't make much sense now does it?
@@catmario-_3170 Mmm I think after Ms. Afton left/died(?), Micheal needed someone but William neglected him around those times which I think is the reason why Micheal turned out the way he did. And just as OP here said in the comments, about William not acknowledging Micheal as his own child, must've caused a spark of hatred and jealously from Micheal to the Crying Child. Like, your close parental figure left/died(?). Your other parental figure doesn't even see you as his own kid and you have no other parental figure to help you with your grief of losing your closer parental figure. Oh and that neglectful parental figure of yours loves your siblings more than you. I can see why he ended that way but it's definitely not an excuse for him to bully his younger sibling.
Holy crap, you're so good at theorizing without complicated background proof, but instead just using common logic. It's surprisingly more difficult to do than it sounds tbh. Loved this haha!
I like this theory, but my main problem is that if it was the day of his burial, he wouldn’t say he’s off to that place again. Unless michael has ran off to it several times during the day, I don’t think it would make much sense. Even if that was the case, William hasn’t been home so he wouldn’t know that Michael had been running away.
My guess is this is a certain period of time after C.C’s burial. If he went “off to that place again”, that likely means it’s a semi-regular occurrence for him. I’m willing to bet this takes place a long while after C.C’s burial. Several weeks to a couple months perhaps? Maybe even a year or so? This would also explain why William isn’t allowed at Jr’s. He’s miserable, become an alcoholic over the period of time from C.C’s death, and went there long enough to be known regular and at some point cause a situation so severe it resulted in him permanently being kicked from what we can only assume is a bar. Perhaps it’s the anniversary of C.C’s death, or maybe this is a regular thing for William and Micheal? Either, it likely takes place sometime after the burial.
@@siresquawksMichael is going to his brother's grave, but "later that night" refers to the night of Charlie's murder. Charlie could've died months or weeks after CC and it'd fit better than it being the same day as CC's burial or funeral.
A few days ago I was just thinking about it. Michael protecting his brother being a bully in the same time, and a child with a bitten forehead running through the window sounds very illogical. The mother is someone I've never thought of, but makes a lot of sense. Thank you for this video.
WAIT, I JUST REALIZED Are the funtimes supposed to represent the WHOLE afton family? Baby = Elizabeth Ballora = Mother Funtime Foxy = Michael (Because foxy mask) Funtime Freddy = Crying Child (Because Fredbear)
ehh Foxy and and Freddy seem like a bit of a reach besides, the little Bonnie thing is a big part of FT Freddy's character and that doesn't fit in we know Elizabeth is Baby and Ballora is probably the Afton mother so that lines up also I'd point out Michael already is represented in the story by, well Michael
What about ennard the one with the most remnant out of any animatronic The thing that William wants, ennard also killed Michael and William sent Michael there
@@benjamina6618 I think they mean that William represented his family through his creations, not so much representing in a narrative sense. So in that sense, the little Bonnie could be like the toys that CC plays with? Idk. Definitely a stretch, but considering SL was when Scott went all in on letting us know the Afton family was central to the story, it's not impossible.
@@benjamina6618 bon bon could be explained as William uses the Fredbear plush to watch crying child and William is represented by rabbits so that makes bon bon (still a reach tho also I think they meant not in sister location but when being built lore wise)
I think this is right Also No no she’s bald right? Not a divorce She’s dying of cancer This actually makes sense! It’s why afton is trying to cheat death with his machines! He’s trying to save his wife but it all goes horribly wrong
Afton is also trying to save his son since he experimented with making the SL animatronics by trying to figure out how to keep a person soul inside a thing
Jr's not being a Freddy's location is, surprisingly, something I never gave any thought. Because let's remember, William is in a partnership with Henry at this point, so he would be co-owner. If we add what happened in SL to the situation, it wouldn't be far fetched to believe that Henry would have a problem letting him into the restaurant. That's my train of thought anyway.
Wendigoon takes this into account with his timeline and just that simple detail gives us such a more nuanced story with a simple and effective plot- that's why i like it
@@Itariatan i always got ideas similar to his about the timeline- i would always get so frustrated when people pulled "C.C died got revived and then dies again for golden Freddy" or "theres actually more 5 missing kids" etc etc etc Because this is is stuff that NEVER is supported by the games or blowing out of proportion small detail with no regard to narrative
@@punusername3445 Yeah. Also kinda frustrating how some people to this day still believe C.C. is Michael. When it's been debunked for some time now lol.
I'm honestly not sure why this video isn't more popular. One thing that I would like to say is that I, personally, believe that the animatronic that was standing outside of Michael Afton's bedroom window could have been Fredbear/Golden Freddy/Crying Child who teleported outside of his window to stalk and scare Michael for accidentally killing him in the Bite of '83.
I always thought that the person who ran away was Micheal, I'm pretty sure cc wouldn't do such thing Also, I have the theory that old man consequence is Henry Emily, and the "bear"(which represents golden freddy) who drowns in the lake is Cassidy. basically the minigame is when Cassidy "left William to the demons" and sets her soul free, and the things that Henry said were an advice for Cassidy, "let the demon (William) to his demons, rest your own soul". Also, if you speed up the soundtrack of the old man consequences secret minigame, you can hear William screaming Henry and Mike's name, asking for help.
Though you have a point, my older brother was like the worst of rebellious and aggressiv teenagers, pretty mean to me, but when I was not around, he told my parents to go easy on me, when they went over the top with unrealistic expectations like being displeases with me having a b in a subject I struggled with and things like that. Being a mean older sibling does not mean they can not care or stick up for you, on the contrary, that typ or paradoxical relationship is what being siblings is all about!
Oh shoot I didn't even realise this theory barely used details from the books as evidence until you said so at the end, that's honestly pretty commendable, and I agree they are a bit of a crutch at this point in the theory scene. This was really well constructed and I was fully with you the whole way through. The TV thing did make me think ok where is this going but it actually works in the context that this theory proposes, in a rather narratively sound way too. I was always a believer that the person in the chair wasn't Michael, but this video provides a solid explanation for a very plausible answer. Love it.
Maybe it's Michael some time after the bite accident because he does look a little older, assuming CC was "put back together" and now stays in the FnaF 4 house which is different from the layout of the house next to Fredbears, and the nightmares are literally just nightmares, while the days before the party are flashbacks to before the bite, before CC was put back together. So it makes sense Micheal would be sympathetic to CC since it wad an accident. Also I think the patch of dirt in midnight motorist is the secret entrance to the elevator that leads to the sister location. It is underground afterall, but it could also be CCs human remains.
reading too much into something that wasn't there man- The games literally have no cues or foreshadow for crying child being alive after the bite (and narrative wise, this random ass cutscene wouldn't be the thing to reveal it)
There is one big issue with your theory. The survival logbook says otherwise and that CC has been gone for a while. We see Cassidy talk to the bite victim through out the book, asking him questions like "does he still talk to you?" near a drawing of the fredbear plush, or "do you remember your name?" and "The party was for you." The crying child responds to Cassidy and it's made pretty clear that he does not remember anything about his previous life and is basically stuck in a limbo between life and death, an endless pitch black void where he can hear the voices of dead people and living people.
I think you’re wrong but you also are right about some things. I like the idea of Charlottes death being in the anniversary of Evan/Crying Child’s death as revenge on Henry for making fredbear. It would explain the random act of violence on someone so close to him.
Ok I have the most mind blowing theory. So mrs. Afton on the couch notice how she does not have any hair. I think she may have suffered from cancer. That would explain the no hair and Mrs. Afton being absent from the series! This would explain a downward spiral of William in the series. He just lost his kid to the brother who put him in the jaws of Fred-bear. His wife suffering from a severe illness that eventually led to her death. Not to mention that he just killed charlotte which was his first kill ever recorded in the series.his wife wouldn’t divorce him at that point it just doesn’t make sense. From this point in the timeline everyone’s prospective is that Williams business is thriving. This would also add to the ballora is Mrs. Afton. William would go onto take her remnant and inject it into ballora causing the animatronic to become possessed.
Oh but he would divorce her because in the Immortal and Restless, it was shown that they have a serious argument and in Sb audio tape, it was implied that they are divorced. Cancer makes no sense because we don't even know the identity of the couch person, it could be Henry due to the colour palette. There is no proof that she died from cancer because it was never confirmed in any way. And Ballora could be possessed without the human soul due to agony just like Springbonnie from Into the Pit novel.
I honestly just came back to FNaF1-FNaFWorld to try and look at it from the new perspective (I wish I also read FF), and I forgot how confusing it is. Back in the 2017 I've thought about the idea of CC being Michael, and since then I gave it all my trust But at one point we had a really long night debate with a group of friend after Matpat's "CC = Sammy Emily" theory, and I realized that there's always something in the francshise that completely contradicts almost anything. And if it doesn't, then there's a thousand ways to interpret it. I think FNaF unironically needs a reboot. I would love to see Steelwool or someone else make a smaller location for a bigger story, like Family Diner. It could tell a lot about everything! Love your idea! I think it is still possible that this and FNaF 4 gameplay are separated events because there's things for me to believe FNaF 4 happens in between FNaF 1 nights. I also think Michael was more afraid of Nightmare. He has a visible endoskeleton feet that would leave the same footprints, and he does kinda appear to follow Michael, both in FNaF 2 and 3 (and arguably SL)! It honestly leaves more questions to think about, but whatever
Yes!!!! fnaf 10, Fredbears family diner as a simpe fnaf game to clear up the lore surrounding the early part of the story. It could definitively explain things like nightmare fredbear, and the phantom animatronics.
Oh wow I actually had a really similar theory to this one, what with it being Mike's mom in the chair & Mike being the one to run off & the mound being the crying child's grave, where I differed on it though was that rather than the foot prints being nightmare, there the crying child in the form of shadow Freddy (hence nightmares line of "the shadow (crying child) fears me" ) potentially trying to lure him to the fnaf 2 location (jrs) to help the other spirits or something .whilst this does contradict the "later that night" detail , I feel that the theory is more narativly satisfying than the minigame just being there to point out the fact that ms.afton exist, not to mention "later that night" is kind vauge & could apply to a lot
I think that the thing on Michael being good then bad could just be he was just a brother. He tormented his brother but knew that the crying child was having a bad day so he didn’t do it that day
Pretty cool but I just got a couple o nitpicks: -Nightmare fredbear if u look really closely has 4 toes, the footprints have 3 toes, heck it would make more sense for it to be N. Chica outside because she has 3 toes. A lot of people also point to the shadows as being a possibility. Maybe it is just N. Fredbear and a toe washed away in the rain, who knows. If I were you and I wanted to choose a yellow bear I would've went with golden freddy, cuz he's maybe fredbear, has 3 toes, and his phantom freddy form in fnaf 3 as mike's hallucination walking past the window would be a nice tie in. -Depending on who you think fredbear plush is, most people think its charlie, then charlie would already be dead by this point, as she may have died before fnaf 4 83 and possess the fredplush (perhaps) if you believe in charlie plush, it would date this to be prior to fnaf 4 83 -BV died in a hospital, so it would be kind of strange for them to just bury him in the deep forest with not even a tombstone, instead of a graveyard like in fnaf 6. -The dialog do be close to fredplush and bv, but if we were going to have to choose between couch person = bv, fredplush, and micheal, we'd go with micheal because the other two wouldn't make much sense given the context, and the dialog is more gray than white like bv's and fredplush is. -At timestamp 5:07, we can probably deduce that runaway kid's "rough day" probably wasn't having to bury the bite victim in the dirt pile, because the runaway kid has "ran off to that place again", meaning the dirt pile was probably more than a day old, unless that same day Mike ran off to the grave. These I guess would be explanation stuff for the stuff you brought up about the characters, but character personalities are kinda up for interpretation and not really hard evidence based: -The couch person being sympathetic is strange for micheal at this point, as when bv was alive he was mean. Micheal does do cruel pranks, however probably not as bad as william potentially beating his kids. Micheal, even being the meanie he is at this point, probably wouldn't go tell his dad he wants to beat up bv together as his beatings may be real severe and probably still loves bv as family. William only seems to be angry at the run away kid because he doesn't beat up the couch person though. -The bravery of the runaway kid does seem to not align with bv, however bv does at one point try to run towards the exit at fredbears (although fails). Also, this being before fnaf 4 83, could mean that BV is crying the way that he is now, because of "what he saw", perhaps sometime after he ran off. Maybe this could've triggered a change in micheal as well, making fun of how now bv is scared of the animatronics and acts like such a baby. -Micheal's motivation is really trippy here also... Micheal supposedly ran off to go to bv's grave pile because he was having a rough day as he just lost his brother and he was burried. I don't wanna be that guy but I think Micheal is over reacting. BV died in a hospital, I'd assume he would've been around when bv was being burried and that Mike also could visit any time in the day but instead chooses to break a window in the middle of the night, and also it would seem strange for william keep mike from visiting bv's grave with N. Fredbear outside, unless fredbear is a guilt thing william put. Thanks for reading my essay I subscribe u
this is a very good theory and something I never thought about, Michael going from no care in the world bully to "leave him be tonight" - it just does not make any sense. Although I think this theory would make more sense and would be better, I don't think it works (or at least not in THAT way) because Crying Child doesn't die first in the timeline, Henry states in the FNAF 6 ending monologue that this entire story all started from William killing Charlie - the wound first infected on him, so the only possible way this works is if this is later another night that ISN'T Charlie's death. Just my thoughts, but great research and theory, subscribed :)
That’s not what Henry implies in his speech. He says he’s sorry he couldn’t help her that day like she helped the other spirits. Plus Charlotte being the first death has the plot hole of William killing her for no reason. Yes in the novels he wants immortality and is jealous and what not, but in the games his family seems to be way more of a factor in his character, so him killing Charlotte to make Henry miserable like him fits way more.
@@siresquawks that is what is implied with his speech, quote "a wound first inflicted on me, but then one that I let bleed out to cause all of this." his daughter's death, an event that bled out and caused every event that followed also William's motivation cannot be to make Henry miserable, because after he killed Henry's daughter he was successful in his goal and those motivations are settled, but he then creates robots in order to literally capture and murder children after said motivations are settled, to the point he loses one of his own - I genuinely do not think William has motivations in the games, not just because there's no good answer, but also because not all serial killers have any motivations and do just kill for no reason
Well in Williams history it is a wound first inflicted on Henry. But not the first incident in the series. Also his motives were settled, until he sees the security puppet alive and tries to recreate it, causing the rest of the series. Fnaf 2’s phone guy confirms the company knows about the Puppet’s sentience “it’s always thinking and it can go anywhere”. If he could get Charlotte to walk again, why can’t he get his son too? I mean why would he be so specifically obsessed with remnant by making the funtimes if he had no motive related to it? Shouldn’t he just keep killing kids randomly? Why is there is so much lore built around the scooper and how it works and affects movement and life if Remnant wasn’t important to William and Henry? If Williams goal wasn’t to control how something comes back to life, then sister location becomes pointless. I feel like William only really makes sense when he’s a psychopath obsessed with trying to get his son to come back, and after he sees it can be done with Charlotte never stops trying to get it to happen the way he wants.
@@siresquawks with that remnant stuff I think it's safe to say it'd make more sense as Immortality or just some basic "mad science" stuff (as in no motivation again), because William does NOT care for his kids at all, he is an abusive person Crying Child, not only does he spy on him, but after he discovers remnant via the funtimes, we see no attempt to bring him back at all, he just moves on to the other random kids - we also see in every FNAF 4 minigame Crying Child crying, and we only see William just keep doing his job and not caring at all, but also (possibly) leaves him trapped in the storage room Michael, if we assume he's the FNAF 3 and 6 player, he is aggressively trying to kill him Elizabeth, he is the most abusive towards (at least in the books) he slaps her constantly to the point this happens: "'Am I not enough?' she asked softly.'No, your not," He said firmly, looking away." - not to mention that he sent Michael down to "put her back together" which means it's entirely possible William knew that Elizabeth possessed Baby, so for the entire time Entertainment and Rentals was open, he not only leaves her down there and doesn't try to help, but also would allow random technicians to electrocute his daughter because he cares about her...? He also denies her wishes to go see Circus Baby who he's told is made just for her - which is a giant lie in itself - which is just because he's a bad father, if you look at the blueprints for Circus Baby she's the only animatronic who has an emergency stop feature, meaning he could've done that easily just so she could finally see Baby I thought he cared for his kids and that's the whole reason the story unfolds how it does too, but as soon as I shared that I immedately got told why it's the complete opposite, so I remember the reasons vividly, and it proves he doesn't care, there is no timeline (even in the books where anything can happen) where he does
Yeah but a lot of events are subjective. Baby clearly cares about her dad enough to want to “make him proud”, and he took the effort to at least say not to go near baby (which is more than Silver Eyes William would). Not to mention in its own way, Psychic Friend Fredbear is his way of keeping the Bite Victim safe, though in a serial killer control freak kind of way. And based on the fact that the Fnaf 4 nights are mirrored from Michael’s Fnaf 1 experiences, Michael’s connection to Nightmare Fredbear, and that William took Psychic friend Fredbear down with him into the secret room (implying that the Bite Victim is no longer alive, meaning he should still have it), it seems more like the secret room was made to keep track of and control Michael, who is a trouble maker who killed his younger brother. Not to mention he basically sends Michael to his death for the events of sister location, implying William’s hatred is almost squarely focused on Michael in the game’s continuity. And there’s the Vanessa Divorce story in Security Breach, where it’s mentioned she was manipulated by her dad to swing the custody battle in “Bill’s” Favor. Now why Vanessa seems to be Elizabeth could be any number of reasons, but point is, this implies that William still wanted custody of his kids. Game William is a psychopath who wants control over everything in his life after his youngest son died. Interestingly, Baby’s shock button is the only one in the game to seemingly not work all the time. It works on night 1, but not night 2 onwards. And hand unit specifically tries to get you to not go to her room for maintenance, implying that the fundamentals of the facility are biased in her favor. William definitely isn’t a good parent, but he’s not just an asshole like the novel version. There are rules and behavior patterns shown in the series.
I don’t think Scott is changing the meaning, or adding meaning where it isn’t there. I’m pretty sure he’s just telling the same story from different perspectives. Scott’s problem is that, after showing both sides, he wants his fandom to meet it in the middle, and they never do. So instead of leaving it as is, he just retells the story in a new game. He’s been doing this ever since Fnaf 2. He does change things as he goes along, but each lore change could be an active effort to tell the same emotional story in a more clear way. Edit: this is why he wrote all of those books in the first place. Think about it, it’s the same three themes explored in each book. The books are there to spell out the emotional aspect of this story. It’s not straight-forward, because emotions aren’t either.
Great video. Last week while my whole family, myself included, were sick as dogs with a stomache bug, and I spent a day and a half in bed, and the whole time my brain was fixated on the issue of midnight motorist. The explanations all fell into one of two categories: 1. Mustard Man is William and person in room is crying child. The problem here is that it makes the whole mini game pointless. It gives us absolutely no new or even interesting information. We already know William is a controlling father and crying child has a fixation on a specific place. What would be the point of making midnight motorist if the scene it contained didn't say anything? 2. Just the opposite. A theory so wild and out of left field and completely speculative that there's no plausible way it fits alongside the other fnaf 6 easter eggs, which are all fairly close to known source material. I buy almost everything you say which is very gratifying since the mystery has bugged me for so long, as I've never considered it "solved". My big reservation is that the theory is predicated on the assumption that Mustard Man is William Afton. Everyone's identity in the theory is projected off of that presumption, and that presumption is based solely off of what? The car? and that's it? Meanwhile, I frankly just don't quite buy William Afton as a drunk getting kicked out of a bar and bullying his kids. Even as Scraptrap, decades later, most of that being twisted as a permanently tortured spirit grafted to a series of bear traps that resemble a bunny, William's dialogue is reserved, intelligent, and...... patient. "What a deceptive calling. I knew it was a lie the moment I heard it, obviously. But it is intriguing nonetheless." As a tortured spirit zombie walking in a bunny robot, he's still calm and collected enough to recognize a trap, analyze it, walk into the trap on purpose, and mess with the person trying to trap him. Presumably before becoming Springtrap, Afton was even *more* calm and collected. The drunk driver kicked out of a bar to go home and argue with the kids just..... doesn't strike me as in character. Remember, this quote was written for the same game as midnight motorist, so this is how Scott thought of William at that time. That said I think this is far and away the best theory I've ever heard on the subject. It fits, contributes to backstory which is what fruity maze did in the same game, and isn't so wild and out there that it would require three games of its own to explore. Thanks for the work.
Listen that Mrs Afton bit could be complete B.S but I'm so happy just because it actually acknowledges that scene because that has been burning in my head for years now
Speaking from experience, older brothers can be assholes one minute and then caring the next. So that's not a particularly heavy point, but you might be on to something.
this is a nice theory, i always enjoy hearing people's theories on midnight motorist considering it's still a bump in the rug in most people's understandings of the game lore. i hear a lot of people making the argument that it's not michael watching tv, and while i personally disagree with that, it's still interesting to hear who people think it is
I actually thought the same thing, with both midnight motorist, and Williams motive for killing Charlie, though I theorize that there is way more to it than just jealousy
I honestly have no idea how I never thought of this. C.C. being the one who really away to "that place" (what me and most people who believed it was C.C. thought was fredbears) makes no sense since he is known for hating fredbears. Also, I don't think the animatronic was Nighmare fredbears since he has 4 toes like others said in the comments. Golden Freddy has three toes so it could have been him which might also mean C.C. possesses fredbear with cassidy since there isn't a reason for cassidy to go to the Afton household AND they most likely wouldn't even know where it is.
i think someone made a similar theory the only difference (which i agree with) is that the foot prints outside are from golden freddy/crying child which makes sense because golden freddy is either an illusion or can teleport because in fnaf 2 when you put the mask on he fades away
I mean idk if he's an illusion. Multiple people can see him and we know that since jeremy fitzgerald is definitely a different person than michael afton. I agree that golden freddy could have been there. An interesting thing to point out is one of the fazbear frights novels talk about these glasses with an illusion of ballora whenever you put the glasses on. But she interactes with the world as she can move leaves and stuff. Maybe golden freddy is similar in this way? Idk just some speculation.
Good theory! However I feel like the mother would be crying over her son on the day of the bite. Michael would be watching TV trying to distract his brain from the horrible disaster
6:16 i am so sorry but this has been bugging me, i seriously love your video- it clears more stuff up than matpat did in his theory videos but I’m desperate to know what fnaf ost this is
also if Mom is grey, then that's her half of the genes in Mike - he sounds like her a bit? like, I looked like my dad as a baby, and my personality is more my dad but I look like my mom now.
To put the nail on the coffin to confirm this (if you hate using the books for theories dont read this comment): On the 8th Fazbear Frights book Gumdrop Angel, the third story called What We Found is about Hudson, who in his childhood got abused by his father, and now has found a job as a night guard at a place named Fazbear Frights, which is the FNaF 3 location. During one of his night shifts, he sees an animatronic, Springtrap. During another night shift (or the same, I really don't remember the story that much), Springtrap starts attacking him, while either Springtrap says things that Hudson's father used to say, or Hudson is imagining Springtrap saying things that his father used to say. Because Springtrap is William Afton, and in the story Springtrap is saying things Hudson's father used to say when abusing Hudson, to me that feels like a parallelism with William and Michael, and if in the story Hudson is kind of like Mike, and Hudson got abused, that probably means that Michael was abused by his father.
What if the house is the one we see in the fnaf 4 title screen where the aftons moved away from Freddy’s after the crying child died or maybe to be closer to his grave site
Do you think this clip and the opening screen / gameplay from FNAF4 suggest Afton always, literally, had animatronics around the house? Because I feel like the events of FNAF4 aren't just dreams, but memories of things actually being around the house.
Really good theory! One thing that's been really bugging me (even though I 100% agree with your theory): who do you think the main character in fnaf 4 is? There seems to be some very strong implications that the person is the crying child: note that the fnaf 4 POV shows they were only as high as the bed, the room had lots of toys and there were a vase of flowers as well as an IV stand next to the bed.
Inarguably the crying child was the original intended player of 4. But I feel that Scott had to move it towards Mike as the player later when Dream theory was retconned (a video topic I'm working on).
@@siresquawks Might want to be careful about this, because Scott's reddit post (the one about retconning) says in an edit at the bottom that the retcon was a seamless integration; michael being the fnaf 4 protagonist rather than the crying child is definitely not seamless. Also, relooking at the evidence I provided, I think the IV bag/vase of flowers can be explained by what matpat said in his latest theory, which is further supported that those objects appear out of nowhere randomly when you turn to the bed (indicative that it's an illusion, though the logistics of that seem weird, so maybe a hallucination). Further evidence for the pov being michael is the crying child room =/= the fnaf 4 game room (though i'm pretty sure cartography in the games is a bit screwed up lmao, at least the main details seem to be very absent (two doors, bed away from door, no closet etc.)). Couter-point to this (and thus evidence for dream theory) is what fingertrap (very clearly mirroring springtrap) as well as chica's missing beak (called out by scott, so very clearly representing fnaf 2) are doing in a cutscene of the past. So you could be right, idk.
Im sorry, but wasnt this like the first theory about midnight motorist ? People first thought it was Miss Afton first before it being Michael. But the watching tv as a memory seems pretty legit. And yea the kid that ran away definitely isnt crying Child.
I think my original comment here got deleted. I made a Reddit post about just this over a year ago. Yeah, it’s definitely a story of an abusive dad and a rebellious teenage son. Look up on the FNAF subreddit “A different view of Midnight Motorist” (I don’t think RUclips likes links in comments). I don’t agree that the person at the chair is the mom though it’s possible. The character looks bald to me so I just say they aren’t anybody important (uncle Afton). And I think the footsteps outside aren’t from Nightmare Fredbear but rather Shadow Freddy who says “Follow Me” in the FNAF 3 mini games and in the twisted ones. Good video. Another thing to note that’s a problem for this video is the sprite name of the person in the chair. It’s “mansitting.png.”
I'd like to propose a question, are you actually Michael in FNAF 4? It would explain the fact that Nightmare Fredbear haunts him outside his window (and in my theory) in his dreams, and other references to FNAF 4 in other games it's the memory of what he did to his brother fucking with him and giving him the nightmares of the Nightmares idk
The Nightmares also attack with very similar patterns to the FNAF1 animatronics. Also, you can hear a backwards version of a phone guy message at random points during the nightmare. We're definitely Michael in FNAF4. The timeline is the only question. What little signs there are seem to point to during the events of FNAF1. Perhaps Michael is being influenced by his brother. If there's any truth to the idea that William was messing with the CC's head as well and making him see these things, then maybe CC is showing Michael what happened to him, and that's what truly starts off Michael's journey into discovering what his father has done. But that's just me, as I'm of the firm belief that the FNAF1 location was Michael's first job (Jeremy and Fritz are just Jeremy and Fritz), and SL came later.
I think the purple guy being orange in this minigame means that he isn't in the iconic purple uniform at the time, cuz why would he, this is after the fredbear pizzeria shenanigans and before he'd take the purple uniform again for his devious schemes
All I know is that its 80’s music playing in that mini game. But I fully agree with this. Mike is strong enough to break that glass window and run out. But the steps of the animatronic throw me off. Ooooor. The other window is CC room and when Mike saw the animatronic in the window and bam. Busted window.
Idk, but for me quote about "rough day" wasn't something that person watching TV said. I've always considered it as thought that "narrator" or Williams says to himself when trying to approach this person.
"The Shadow fears me" is NMF's most-interesting line _by far_ and I've questioned its meaning for a while now. I tried to make it work for Shadow Freddy/Bonnie, since that's the most literal association we have with the word 'shadow', but it... doesn't really make sense.
I hope Sire Squawks see's this comment I've seen a couple vids now and I love your ability to not just stick to what's been agreed on or what been agreed been to complicated and how you can effectively use your best guesses to come to satisfying conclusions that's what I loved about fnaf theories but until recent the community especially for fnaf SB has had real bad tunnel vision this and with theory's like these coming from you fuhnaff and Ozone new life in the franchise is flourishing and new ideas concepts and theories are hella fun (side note Scott admits he retcons things all the time so I love love love that you agree and think a lot like me when examining previous things we could not understand at the time) aside from that keep up the good work you just earned a new sub bro
I remember just before FNAF 4 released (might've been just after), Scott said he'd only done one real retcon and that he didn't like the idea of retconning things willy-nilly. It seems a bit strange that he would now admit to 'retconning things all the time'.
9:30 entitled? she just wanted an ice cream, idk if getting got by the claw is a proportionate punishment 😂 i'm just joking though, this is an awesome vid !
Tbh I always thought that "he's had a rough day" line was Will's thoughts, and that Mike is the couch guy (based off the solid evidence that Mike likes watching TV in SL lol) and explains why Will can't interact with Mike any further during the minigame. Mike's had a rough day, Will's going to leave him alone. 🤷♂️
Well he has the same text colour as the foxybro,although I agree Mike is the runaway kid since I believe mike is BV, but if Williams text colour matches why not the foxybrother?
Ehh, depending on what you count as William's dialouge the color does change a lot. Psychic Friend Fredbear's dialogue can range from yellow to white, while his 6 dialogue is much more of an orange.
This is the best MM theory I've heard by far. Non of the others mentioned the hidden area with the stones, and your interpretation is awesome. Congrats dude, I hope your theory gets more views, even Matpat, cause I think you're right dude
Someone acually thought this minigame shows bite victim(probably Evan) running away and the person watching tv was Michaell?I knew person watching tv is Ms Afton and the one who run away is Mike since 2017,this theory makes so much sense that after 5 years i still take it as a fact
There was an idea awhile ago that William killed Henry’s daughter because Henry knew how to infuse animatronics with remnant or some sort of life or had a theory about doing so and then when Williams kids died he asked Henry for help and when Henry said no he took his kid away so he’d be more willing to do it or would do something that William would be able to replicate I know it probably doesn’t fit with the lore cause nothing does but I thought it was a fun thought to add
Idk these are a bit of a reach. Its hard to assume conversations happening with them unless we have proof from the games about it. For example with this video, there are a few little connections and assumptions, but they fit with the story of this minigame.
Fuhnaff mentioned about the glass scraps on Security Breach which made me rethink this Midnight Motorist. I don't agree that someone went out from the inside but rather something from the outside went inside the house. Why? If you check the back of the house, there's no glasses below the window out of the house. If you break the window from the inside, the glasses would be outside. If you break glass outside, glass shards would be inside the house. Question. Do you see any glass outside the house in midnight motorist? No? Then that meant someone from the outside went inside that house.
Bro- Michael killed his little brother. William (the orange guy In the minigame) said “lets leave him alone tonight” because he has been relentlessly blaming him for Evans death. Jr’s is fnaf 2 location where William killed Henry’s daughter because he wants Henry to be as miserable as he is. We know this because Henry built the Security puppet to protect his daughter. And the only known location with the puppet is fnaf 2.
Issues with this. The person on the couch is the one saying “leave him alone, he’s had a rough day”, not William. Secondly, the second half of midnight motorist is called “Later that Night” in the game files. This means the mini game happens after Security Puppet since the ending of that minivan segways into the start of “Later that night”. William can’t drive him from where he killed Charlotte, and then midway on his was home pass the building where he killed Charlotte. That’s like killing someone in LA, then driving to New York, and then someone says “they must be driving by their crime scene” when the reach the completely unrelated Las Vegas city. Likewise, as I said in the video, William just killed Charlotte. And we know he never got caught, and still was able to make the Funtime Animatronics, so he’s still apart of the company. Meaning if Jrs was Fnaf 2 Freddy’s then he would still be allowed to go there. Not to mention this mini game is set around the Fredbear Era, meaning the unknown Fnaf location after Fredbear’s and before 2 likely hasn’t happened, and Fnaf 2 hasn’t happened.
So, just gonna toss it out here, Afton made Bellora in his wife's image but Bellora is not his wife's soul, as far as we know none of the animatronics in Sister Location outside of Circus Baby are full on possessed. There's never been any victims names associated with them and the Security Puppet never granted them souls like she did the core cast members, especially since Sister Location is a prequel. Then again the games are notoriously hard to tell who is possessed, who's just glitching, and who's an advanced AI, like seriously, we know of like 8 actual possessions and everyone else is just a fucking mystery.
The song that Ballora sings is mighty sus, though. It's not a song that you would willingly program into an animatronic meant to serve at parties, and Ballora sings this song at night when she's at the Sister Location, IE, _not_ at a party like she's bored and has nothing else to do.
@@Dhalin I don't see why a psychopathic kid killing narcissist wouldn't program that kind of song into the robot facsimile of his wife. Further the song isn't really even that bad, we can infer those lyrics to mean a whole lot of things, lastly we don't even know if they were programmed into her. The animatronics are capable of speaking, they can synthesize speech, what's to say Ballora isn't just singing her own lyrics?
@@boanoah6362exactly, robots can have their own mind too, and robots are programmed often to sound a specific way and have a specific personality, just look at the Mimic, many of us would never know that Glitchtrap/Burntrap is a mimic (if Scott would have never implied it) because of how well he acts as William, he copied him really well and you would really think that it's actually William because of how advanced the technology of the future has become. It could make you feel confused about what's real and what isn't (just look at Blade Runner which takes place in the near future just like the events after Help Wanted, remember how the main protagonist tried to deceive himself into believing that his wife is a real human despite being only a digital pre programmed recreation?). Even if Ballora is possessed, she isn't possessed by an adult but rather, another victim child just as Scott himself confirmed or she is a hybrid soul like Ennard
wait- did anyone actually thought that the person in the couch was Michael? I thought the consensus back in the day was that the son who broke out was him-
Great theory, but it raises some questions: 1) Was Elizabeth the first one to die then? In the fnaf 4 minigames you can enter a room that looks like Elizabeth's, but she's nowhere to be seen, so she must be dead already. In order, it would look like this: Elizabeth's dead, followed by Crying child's and then Henry's daughter. but she was killed by circus baby, so... 2) Did Afton build the funtime animatronics before any of the events of Fnaf 4 Minigames? I might just be confused at this point, the timeline is complicated :P
No. After replaying the start of Sister Location, the game says that Sister Location was made after the closure of Freddy Fazbear's pizza (Though Doesn't specify which) meaning that during the early points in the timeline, there isn't a Freddy's to close. Only Fredbear's. So, Elizabeth might just be in one of the many rooms we can assume exist but can't access in this minigame. Obviously, the Afton house has more than 2 rooms, so it's not unreasonable to assume there's at least one or two more that Elizabeth could be in, asleep or something.
I have been just explaning to my friend the fnaf lore, and I realized that this minigame makes no sense. If thats Evan , Micheal and William in the house, this COULDNT happen after Charlie was killed, that happened after Evan died...so yeah wtf xdd
Except ones used by the largest theory channels on the platform that people bitch at me on Freddit for if I ever treat it as fact. If this is how you thought about it, congrats. Thanks for being on my side. Also, the title is a game theory parody so what did you expect?
I have a personal problem with saying that low that came out of nowhere, because Funtime foxy could be said to come out of nowhere in that game as well, both being in sister location
The person on the couch and Michael from FNaF 4 have the same dialogue color. That’s a very important detail that I doubt Scott would include by accident, also him sitting on his chair and watching TV signifies that it is indeed Michael, also in Security Breach the Mother is displayed in Blue and Purple coloring (Ballora’s colors funnily enough) while the person on the chair is in gray, which is Michael’s color from FNaF 4. Not a bad theory but I doubt it’s actually true.
They actually don’t. It is grey, but when you compare them they don’t look much alike. This is an even greater difference than something like Fredbear’s dialogue changing. Mike’s is far darker than couch person’s.
it's not an Afton it's just a random kid that got kidnapped/lured away by Spring Bonnie and you play as the drunk dad coming home to discover this. that's why the game has you swerve all over the road, that's why the bar, that's why the 'don't be hard on him'. Green man isn't Henry; he's a bartender/bouncer/bar owner who kicks the drunk guy out. it's the exact same concept with Fruity Maze and Susie and I don't see ya'll saying Susie's an Afton. William took kids that were probably really easy to convince to follow him.
The difference is Susie’s is an MCI kid. She died in Freddy’s, and was lured IN Freddy’s. This would require Afton to walk through the rain in the moisture prone spring lock suits to kidnap some random kid for no reason. What’s the relevance of this minigame if that’s the plot? This kid isn’t golden Freddy because then the 5th MCI kid becomes pointless. Not to mention the kid leads their own footprints and the animatronics stop several feet away, and are only a single pair. Not to mention this secret half of the mini game is called “Later that night” following up directly from Charlotte’s death in Security puppet, where care tracks drive off. This minigame starts with someone driving off. (See video on Nightmare Fredbear explanation). Not to mention, as shown in the private room in sister location, William is a control freak over his household. Explaining why he gets so pissed at the kid running away. And here’s a theory that didn’t make it into the video (Which I doubt you watched): Nightmare Fredbear in UCN has the power to turn invisible. This would explain the single set of footprints. He’s still there, just invisible because afton turned off scary nightmare bear mode when he got back. William being orange guy is cannon. This isn’t a theory. It’s story telling from within the game itself.
@@siresquawks lmao tell me when you publish that novel and I'll read it. I don't watch MatPat or really many other theory videos. It's already ruined the series so great job. I just see Occam's Razor and remember that Scott's a crappy storyteller. Simple as.
my explaination : this was michael who escaped due to william being abusive due to michael murdering the crying child at the bite of '83 so michael escapes to the pizzaria so he can see henry and see what's happening with the place so later on idk
Probably not, as this would mean that William Kills charlotte, drives home and Michael is somehow there (regardless of whether you believe my theory or not, most theories would have Michael on the couch in some capacity). Even if Fredbears is in Walking distance Michael shouldn't be able to run faster than his dad can drive.
I guess I’m thinking along the lines of crying child dying at the same time Charlie is locked outside (part of why no one notices her). I wouldn’t expect William to come strait home. He just killed a kid, he would need time to cover his tracks, maybe bury a body. It also seems weird that they would let those older kids bully crying child if his parents were around. Unless, the dad said he would be there while he was busy killing Charlie. It would be poetic, both of Afton’s kids being dead due to his love of murder. That would place midnight motorist as later that night from the horrific evening both families experienced.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Great video man! And honestly good point about a lot of the details in FNAF being bluff bait. Like you said, the more details you add at the beginning for no reason, the more you can pull from later on in the franchise and make it seem like you had it planned all along. I see that a lot in FNAF storytelling.
Hi
The problem is that sometimes these things aren’t explained, or the explanation makes no sense considering the previous lore, and it’s all a complete mess.
RyeToast IS IN THE HOUSE!?!
Hi
This is a trashy video thats poorly edited and very rambley, I agree bluff bait stuff is frequent but don’t encourage low quality effort ramble posts.
Another thing to note is if this was an abusive household there's no way the brother would tell off the drunken father.
Like that's just a beating waiting to happen.
Maybe he wasnt physically abusive since he wanted to keep his family safe, evident by refusing to let Elizabeth see circus baby knowing she would die.
@@bonD6002 even still mental abuse breaks down people's ability to stand up to others, especially authority figures.
May not be a physical beating but it'd still be gas lighting or being overly controlling or just shouting at them like he did at the door. Kids are tiny guy twice your size shouts down at you that'd make you shit bricks, I should know lol.
In an abusive household, would a mother be able to tell off the drunken father? Maybe mike could stand a tiny chance, him being close to an adult soon, perhaps?
@@gdeveloper3309 I mean then there's commonly domestic abuse, constant screaming, pushing eachother until one backs down or escalates.
And well the Afton mother left so she clearly wasn't one to back down and take it but not strong enough to stand up and kick him out of her family's life.
Honestly talking bout this is bringing back memories so ima stop. It's really not a fun situation being perfectly honest.
@@gdeveloper3309 true but she is the only other adult so that could be why it may e he has a soft spot for her but that's just speculation
Oh my god, it was a minor part, but you completely blew my mind away by saying "Afton killed charlie because he blames Henry for Fredbear killing his son". It completely solves the problem of why he went from "son died" to "let's murder"
Could also explain why Afton kills even more kids. He simply snaps in grief. His son dies, then he kills Charlie for revenge, and at that point, he's psychotic and just starts killing random kids because if he can't have his kid, then nobody else should enjoy their kids either in some twisted logic of an insane person. Meanwhile, he's doing experiments with infusing souls into animatronics in some effort to bring his son back or somesuch. It's a much better explanation than "MUWAHAHAHA I'M EVIL FOR NO REASON!"
That was obvious wtf
@@Dhalin
Charlie is well implied to die first before CC so his killing didn’t start from grief. There’s still a possibility for mci83 we know from fnaf4 they were killed before CC.
Not to mention there’s theories that CC was revived or rebuilt. (MikeBro, mci85 and mci83 are all theories too)
Not to mention in the books his only child was Elizabeth who died in 1985-87 in it. He killed Charlie in 83. And the missing kids before Elizabeth died.
However the reason he killed the kids according to the books was for immorality.
Its also said in the books he is highly jealous of Henry. Police finding papers he wrote about his hatred to near worship of Henry.
Anger, jealousy, envy can lead to make one do things they wouldn’t do anytime else.
But that wouldn’t make sense cus not Henry „killed“ crying child, the animatronic killed him.
It wasn‘t Henry in the costume
I think he killed before. I find the narrative of his sons death making him a gleefully sadistic murderer very weird
Honestly best explanation for this minigame my only problem is the fact that Nightmare Fredbear clearly has four toes and the animatronic footprints have three toes but I can easily clear this up by saying Crying Child possessing Golden Freddy made those footprints and his been stalking Micheal ever since Mike killed him.
Makes sense.
*ITS ME* helps this.
@@TheGloopOfMobius no it doenst, it's me means nothing, it's said by all the aminitronics and Mike says they ment to talk to William when they said that
@@tomkubus
no proof for that
It’s me
@@tachapaksupun1936
It’s meme
"He and his buddies stop dead"
So did the Crying Child so I clearly see a brotherly connection there
Ah, another dark humor enthusiast I see.
Foul. Absolutely foul. ☠️
I think that Scott writes with loose ideas and then when people get confused about certain parts or a big interest is generated in a particular character he just expands on those ideas and changes things to fit. It works because it's so loose. Kind of reminds me of a d&d game almost. The problem though is after a while it becomes harder and harder to stack those loose ideas and course correct because the narrative inevitably becomes very convoluted and harder to keep track of.
That is the most brilliant analogy to FNAF lore I have ever heard.
@@benwelsh5265 thank you.
Great point but I personally think scott just does things and we the fans theorize about it and make the story for him and he goes with what we say makes the most sense lol 😂
@@kingnathannn207 That's a common view, but it really doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Every game brought something new that literally nobody thought of because he made it up on his own. Nobody theorized a puppet giving life to the animatronics before 2, nobody saw the killer getting springlocked coming before 3 (especially since 1 implied he'd been caught), nobody saw the absolute continuity clustercrap that was 4 coming, lol. And certainly nobody expected what SL brought to the table.
All in all, I'd say that if Scott went with what the fans said... the series would probably make a lot more sense and ended a lot earlier. Oh, and he'd have shown us the damn Bite of 87 by now. But he's always done his own thing.
@@kingnathannn207 I thought that at first too but as time went on it seemed more like he was just retroactively changing things to fit. There's a lot of things that it's clear he went with in terms of theories like William Afton and such, but there's also plenty of other stuff that looks deliberate that wasn't thought up by the fans that made me think it was more like a choose your own adventure sort of thing.
I dont think matpat ever said that ballora IS the mom, as far as I remember he said she represents the mom, William made her like that because he misses his wife, not that she died and possessed ballora because she didnt
This was actually a bit of a recording fluke funny enough. The actual line was “Adjacent to Ballora” but the take I ended up using said “is ballora” which was my bad.
@@siresquawks ah that makes sense
Ballora being possessed by mrs Afton is just an theory
As much as I thought FNAF:SB was a hodgepodge of everything and nothing at the same time, it does give some footing for the Ballora is Ms. Afton or at least represents Ms. Afton theory, since there was that one party room that’s known as “the Afton Room” (the 5 bots at the table, each representing a member of the Afton Family, and one of them looks like Ballora).
It might not be his wife. Baby never calls her by mother.
The couch character saying "he's had a hard day" being the brother after he was the one MAKING the child cry was literally my biggest annoyance in any theory about this game. Thank you lolol
What's so annoying about it?
And more like "before"
@@TheSoulCalledZuziait's annoying because it makes no sense for Michael to say, the minigame takes place at night, most likely after Michael has bullied CC enough for the day (which he does EVERYDAY). empathizing with CC right after a day of tormenting the little guy does not seem like something Michael would do at all, he's exclusively shown to be a bully and only changes after the Bite of 83.
also, him saying this before he would bully CC for the day/night or before his first instance of bullying makes no sense for the same reason I just stated; there's no good evidence that states Michael was anything but a bully for the time we know him before CC gets bitten.
When I first saw this cutscene, I couldn't reason out who that person on the couch was, but I thought it was always talking about Michael running off to that place. I was actually confused by a theory that suggested it was the crying child, because, like you said here, breaking his window and running away isn't really the crying child's MO, but seemed to align well with a semi-aggressive teenager.
This makes total sense!
Also a side note: Why would William drink if his life is presumably going well? It’s because he just lost his youngest son not too long ago.
He begins to drink and lash out at Micheal because William claims that it’s Micheal’s fault (which I don’t blame him for that, Micheal was kinda the guy throwing him into the ol’ chomper.).
William, in a drunken rage over his son’s death and possible hatred for the company, since it was the robots that the company made that did his son in, kills a child outside of Fredbear’s to either take out his rage on another child without being caught, or to experiment with bringing people back to life.
Another thing is maybe he also blamed Henry for building Fredbear and indirectly causing CC's death. He knew Henry cared about Charlie so he in a drunken rage decided to take revenge against him.
Another thing is maybe he also blamed Henry for building Fredbear and indirectly causing CC's death. He knew Henry cared about Charlie so he in a drunken rage decided to take revenge against him.
Yeah, gonna note it ABSOLUTELY cant be experimentation with Remnant. Unless CC was possessing shit (and i suspect it isnt, as he needs to be "guided" by the Puppet it seems?), the first encounter would be AFTER Charlie's own death and possession of the Puppet.
@@tofferooni4972 William created the animatronics.
This minigame takes place in the United Kingdom. William Afton likely was the abused child in the minigame.
Dude, this is some absolutely AWESOME explanation to why Michael is the one who runs away in MN, the Crying Child response to scary things, the Nightmare Fred bear being an illusion, not a nightmare, the detail of Michael and his friends being shocked and not the scene just freezing, Michael having a rough day because it was the day of CC funeral, this observation of things being meaningless in earlier games and being brought back in important ways and the video was so complete and full of information that I thought the video was ending at 2 minutes lol, like, I have so much things to praise but I have very poor memory.
Also the Burying Location joke was very funny to me and the observation of the final scene in FNAF World was very interesting, that's it I guess, great video! You deveres so much more
This theory does really work! There might also be an explanation as to why do Michael and Mrs. Afton have the similar text colors. What I think is that it represents Michael being more alike his mother personality-wise. He might physically look more like his father William Afton but his character is very different from William's, which can be explained by that Mrs. Afton was the one to take care of him most of his childhood. The fact that Michael feels strong guilt about what he did to his younger brother also might prove that because if Michael's personality was also much alike William's he'd have never felt that much guilt, strong enough for him to go out of his way to break the window just to visit his brother's grave. While Michael feels guilt about what he did, William doesn't feel anything about him killing Charlie which would then lead to him go after the other children as well. It also seems like she might've died rather than divorced, judging by that she has no hair in the midnight motorist cutscene and I think it's a common knowledge about what kind of disease would make a person go bald. Michael retains his mother's personality after Mrs. Afton passing away which can be seen by him in the later games as he goes to find Elizabeth Afton as baby, as he sits through the night shifts in the restaurants while supposedly trying to solve the crimes because not only he wants to make up for his mistake but also fix what his father did. In the end even if we take the theory that Glamrock Freddy in Security Breach represents the soul of Michael Afton for granted we may see how much caring he is about Gregory, being like a caring parent to that boy which Mrs. Afton really was as well to her own children and to Michael in particular. That may work even more perfectly if we consider Vanessa representing Elizabeth's soul, and if William was the one to take care of her in her childhood before she was kilked by Baby that would've made her being much like William personality-wise while supposedly being more like her mother in appearance.
Now I also think that the TV show from Sistet Location makes even more sense with that. Dracula keeps saying that the "Baby isn't mine", a baby who's literally a vampire just like Dracula. Just like William refusing to see in Michael his own son despite him having the same physical appearance.
Someone made a theory on reddit that Immortal And The Restless is actually about William Vs Michael.
Their examples being
Michael relating to Clara in SLB
Immortal = William
Restless = Michael
The baby represents the murdered kids.
Clara constantly needling Vlad to take care of baby = William needing to take responsibility for the murders.
Vlad denying the baby is his = William denying him killing despite its obvious he’s the one who did it.
The nursery and working the graveyard shift, that his pay will be docked = Police spending a week investigating to find out what happened to SAVE THEM kids.
William worked likely as a night guard in fnaf2. That he’s either going to get fired or leaving job when the murders are discovered.
Clara lighting house on fire = Fnaf3 fire
great theory, counterpoint- maybe scott just picked a random color for a font-
There's one issue with this theory. Why did Michael bully the crying child to begin with if he had the kind personality of Mrs Afton? That doesn't make sense. A person with a kind loving personality wouldn't bully their little sibling or pick on them. So if Mrs Afton was so loving to Michael and Michael inherited that, then why was he mean to crying child in FNAF 4 then? Doesn't make much sense now does it?
@@catmario-_3170 Mmm I think after Ms. Afton left/died(?), Micheal needed someone but William neglected him around those times which I think is the reason why Micheal turned out the way he did.
And just as OP here said in the comments, about William not acknowledging Micheal as his own child, must've caused a spark of hatred and jealously from Micheal to the Crying Child.
Like, your close parental figure left/died(?). Your other parental figure doesn't even see you as his own kid and you have no other parental figure to help you with your grief of losing your closer parental figure. Oh and that neglectful parental figure of yours loves your siblings more than you.
I can see why he ended that way but it's definitely not an excuse for him to bully his younger sibling.
Holy crap, you're so good at theorizing without complicated background proof, but instead just using common logic. It's surprisingly more difficult to do than it sounds tbh. Loved this haha!
I like this theory, but my main problem is that if it was the day of his burial, he wouldn’t say he’s off to that place again. Unless michael has ran off to it several times during the day, I don’t think it would make much sense. Even if that was the case, William hasn’t been home so he wouldn’t know that Michael had been running away.
This is honestly the best counterpoint I've seen.
My guess is this is a certain period of time after C.C’s burial. If he went “off to that place again”, that likely means it’s a semi-regular occurrence for him. I’m willing to bet this takes place a long while after C.C’s burial. Several weeks to a couple months perhaps? Maybe even a year or so? This would also explain why William isn’t allowed at Jr’s. He’s miserable, become an alcoholic over the period of time from C.C’s death, and went there long enough to be known regular and at some point cause a situation so severe it resulted in him permanently being kicked from what we can only assume is a bar.
Perhaps it’s the anniversary of C.C’s death, or maybe this is a regular thing for William and Micheal? Either, it likely takes place sometime after the burial.
@@crazyminegamer2339 To be fair, if this is JUST after Charlie's death, it would fit the timing pretty damn well...
@@siresquawks no one has told you of how difficult it would be for William Afton to get the body of his dead child back when he died in a hospital?
@@siresquawksMichael is going to his brother's grave, but "later that night" refers to the night of Charlie's murder. Charlie could've died months or weeks after CC and it'd fit better than it being the same day as CC's burial or funeral.
A few days ago I was just thinking about it. Michael protecting his brother being a bully in the same time, and a child with a bitten forehead running through the window sounds very illogical. The mother is someone I've never thought of, but makes a lot of sense. Thank you for this video.
WAIT, I JUST REALIZED
Are the funtimes supposed to represent the WHOLE afton family?
Baby = Elizabeth
Ballora = Mother
Funtime Foxy = Michael (Because foxy mask)
Funtime Freddy = Crying Child (Because Fredbear)
ehh Foxy and and Freddy seem like a bit of a reach
besides, the little Bonnie thing is a big part of FT Freddy's character and that doesn't fit in
we know Elizabeth is Baby and Ballora is probably the Afton mother so that lines up
also I'd point out Michael already is represented in the story by, well Michael
Thats already kinda insinuated like alot of people already think this.
What about ennard the one with the most remnant out of any animatronic The thing that William wants, ennard also killed Michael and William sent Michael there
@@benjamina6618 I think they mean that William represented his family through his creations, not so much representing in a narrative sense. So in that sense, the little Bonnie could be like the toys that CC plays with? Idk. Definitely a stretch, but considering SL was when Scott went all in on letting us know the Afton family was central to the story, it's not impossible.
@@benjamina6618 bon bon could be explained as William uses the Fredbear plush to watch crying child and William is represented by rabbits so that makes bon bon (still a reach tho also I think they meant not in sister location but when being built lore wise)
I think this is right
Also No no she’s bald right? Not a divorce
She’s dying of cancer
This actually makes sense! It’s why afton is trying to cheat death with his machines! He’s trying to save his wife but it all goes horribly wrong
That is an interesting take
And this would still make sense with the idea of Ballora being Mrs. Afton. He made her Ballora to save her
@@Cursed_Curator
Exactlyyy
Afton is also trying to save his son since he experimented with making the SL animatronics by trying to figure out how to keep a person soul inside a thing
That could work but also it might be a sprite thing because that would mean all the mci kids are bald
i love how much this feels like an old school game theory video, the editing, the background music, the quick fire evidence. its amazing
so glad someone finally addressed that the accepted roles in this minigame are very out of character for them
Jr's not being a Freddy's location is, surprisingly, something I never gave any thought. Because let's remember, William is in a partnership with Henry at this point, so he would be co-owner. If we add what happened in SL to the situation, it wouldn't be far fetched to believe that Henry would have a problem letting him into the restaurant.
That's my train of thought anyway.
Wendigoon takes this into account with his timeline and just that simple detail gives us such a more nuanced story with a simple and effective plot- that's why i like it
@@punusername3445 Yep, that's really where I got it from. Thought it made a lot of sense.
@@Itariatan i always got ideas similar to his about the timeline- i would always get so frustrated when people pulled
"C.C died got revived and then dies again for golden Freddy" or "theres actually more 5 missing kids" etc etc etc
Because this is is stuff that NEVER is supported by the games or blowing out of proportion small detail with no regard to narrative
@@punusername3445 Yeah. Also kinda frustrating how some people to this day still believe C.C. is Michael. When it's been debunked for some time now lol.
@@punusername3445 Ooh yeah! There being more than 5 missing kids is really funny to me, cause fnaf 2 itself explains why they're acting up lol.
I'm honestly not sure why this video isn't more popular. One thing that I would like to say is that I, personally, believe that the animatronic that was standing outside of Michael Afton's bedroom window could have been Fredbear/Golden Freddy/Crying Child who teleported outside of his window to stalk and scare Michael for accidentally killing him in the Bite of '83.
I always thought that the person who ran away was Micheal, I'm pretty sure cc wouldn't do such thing
Also, I have the theory that old man consequence is Henry Emily, and the "bear"(which represents golden freddy) who drowns in the lake is Cassidy. basically the minigame is when Cassidy "left William to the demons" and sets her soul free, and the things that Henry said were an advice for Cassidy, "let the demon (William) to his demons, rest your own soul".
Also, if you speed up the soundtrack of the old man consequences secret minigame, you can hear William screaming Henry and Mike's name, asking for help.
Though you have a point, my older brother was like the worst of rebellious and aggressiv teenagers, pretty mean to me, but when I was not around, he told my parents to go easy on me, when they went over the top with unrealistic expectations like being displeases with me having a b in a subject I struggled with and things like that. Being a mean older sibling does not mean they can not care or stick up for you, on the contrary, that typ or paradoxical relationship is what being siblings is all about!
Oh shoot I didn't even realise this theory barely used details from the books as evidence until you said so at the end, that's honestly pretty commendable, and I agree they are a bit of a crutch at this point in the theory scene. This was really well constructed and I was fully with you the whole way through. The TV thing did make me think ok where is this going but it actually works in the context that this theory proposes, in a rather narratively sound way too. I was always a believer that the person in the chair wasn't Michael, but this video provides a solid explanation for a very plausible answer. Love it.
Maybe it's Michael some time after the bite accident because he does look a little older, assuming CC was "put back together" and now stays in the FnaF 4 house which is different from the layout of the house next to Fredbears, and the nightmares are literally just nightmares, while the days before the party are flashbacks to before the bite, before CC was put back together. So it makes sense Micheal would be sympathetic to CC since it wad an accident. Also I think the patch of dirt in midnight motorist is the secret entrance to the elevator that leads to the sister location. It is underground afterall, but it could also be CCs human remains.
But why would he rebuild him just to get angry with him?
reading too much into something that wasn't there man-
The games literally have no cues or foreshadow for crying child being alive after the bite (and narrative wise, this random ass cutscene wouldn't be the thing to reveal it)
There is one big issue with your theory. The survival logbook says otherwise and that CC has been gone for a while. We see Cassidy talk to the bite victim through out the book, asking him questions like "does he still talk to you?" near a drawing of the fredbear plush, or "do you remember your name?" and "The party was for you." The crying child responds to Cassidy and it's made pretty clear that he does not remember anything about his previous life and is basically stuck in a limbo between life and death, an endless pitch black void where he can hear the voices of dead people and living people.
I think you’re wrong but you also are right about some things. I like the idea of Charlottes death being in the anniversary of Evan/Crying Child’s death as revenge on Henry for making fredbear. It would explain the random act of violence on someone so close to him.
Ok I have the most mind blowing theory. So mrs. Afton on the couch notice how she does not have any hair. I think she may have suffered from cancer. That would explain the no hair and Mrs. Afton being absent from the series! This would explain a downward spiral of William in the series. He just lost his kid to the brother who put him in the jaws of Fred-bear. His wife suffering from a severe illness that eventually led to her death. Not to mention that he just killed charlotte which was his first kill ever recorded in the series.his wife wouldn’t divorce him at that point it just doesn’t make sense. From this point in the timeline everyone’s prospective is that Williams business is thriving. This would also add to the ballora is Mrs. Afton. William would go onto take her remnant and inject it into ballora causing the animatronic to become possessed.
I guess a lot of kids in fnaf have cancer then...
Cause a lot of sprites are depicted to being bald.
@@circusbabywantstoeatthekid5702 lmao yea but Michael also has hair in sister location
Oh but he would divorce her because in the Immortal and Restless, it was shown that they have a serious argument and in Sb audio tape, it was implied that they are divorced. Cancer makes no sense because we don't even know the identity of the couch person, it could be Henry due to the colour palette. There is no proof that she died from cancer because it was never confirmed in any way. And Ballora could be possessed without the human soul due to agony just like Springbonnie from Into the Pit novel.
I honestly just came back to FNaF1-FNaFWorld to try and look at it from the new perspective (I wish I also read FF), and I forgot how confusing it is. Back in the 2017 I've thought about the idea of CC being Michael, and since then I gave it all my trust
But at one point we had a really long night debate with a group of friend after Matpat's "CC = Sammy Emily" theory, and I realized that there's always something in the francshise that completely contradicts almost anything. And if it doesn't, then there's a thousand ways to interpret it.
I think FNaF unironically needs a reboot. I would love to see Steelwool or someone else make a smaller location for a bigger story, like Family Diner. It could tell a lot about everything!
Love your idea! I think it is still possible that this and FNaF 4 gameplay are separated events because there's things for me to believe FNaF 4 happens in between FNaF 1 nights.
I also think Michael was more afraid of Nightmare. He has a visible endoskeleton feet that would leave the same footprints, and he does kinda appear to follow Michael, both in FNaF 2 and 3 (and arguably SL)! It honestly leaves more questions to think about, but whatever
Yes!!!! fnaf 10, Fredbears family diner as a simpe fnaf game to clear up the lore surrounding the early part of the story. It could definitively explain things like nightmare fredbear, and the phantom animatronics.
Oh wow I actually had a really similar theory to this one, what with it being Mike's mom in the chair & Mike being the one to run off & the mound being the crying child's grave, where I differed on it though was that rather than the foot prints being nightmare, there the crying child in the form of shadow Freddy (hence nightmares line of "the shadow (crying child) fears me" ) potentially trying to lure him to the fnaf 2 location (jrs) to help the other spirits or something .whilst this does contradict the "later that night" detail , I feel that the theory is more narativly satisfying than the minigame just being there to point out the fact that ms.afton exist, not to mention "later that night" is kind vauge & could apply to a lot
I think that the thing on Michael being good then bad could just be he was just a brother. He tormented his brother but knew that the crying child was having a bad day so he didn’t do it that day
Pretty cool but I just got a couple o nitpicks:
-Nightmare fredbear if u look really closely has 4 toes, the footprints have 3 toes, heck it would make more sense for it to be N. Chica outside because she has 3 toes. A lot of people also point to the shadows as being a possibility. Maybe it is just N. Fredbear and a toe washed away in the rain, who knows. If I were you and I wanted to choose a yellow bear I would've went with golden freddy, cuz he's maybe fredbear, has 3 toes, and his phantom freddy form in fnaf 3 as mike's hallucination walking past the window would be a nice tie in.
-Depending on who you think fredbear plush is, most people think its charlie, then charlie would already be dead by this point, as she may have died before fnaf 4 83 and possess the fredplush (perhaps) if you believe in charlie plush, it would date this to be prior to fnaf 4 83
-BV died in a hospital, so it would be kind of strange for them to just bury him in the deep forest with not even a tombstone, instead of a graveyard like in fnaf 6.
-The dialog do be close to fredplush and bv, but if we were going to have to choose between couch person = bv, fredplush, and micheal, we'd go with micheal because the other two wouldn't make much sense given the context, and the dialog is more gray than white like bv's and fredplush is.
-At timestamp 5:07, we can probably deduce that runaway kid's "rough day" probably wasn't having to bury the bite victim in the dirt pile, because the runaway kid has "ran off to that place again", meaning the dirt pile was probably more than a day old, unless that same day Mike ran off to the grave.
These I guess would be explanation stuff for the stuff you brought up about the characters, but character personalities are kinda up for interpretation and not really hard evidence based:
-The couch person being sympathetic is strange for micheal at this point, as when bv was alive he was mean. Micheal does do cruel pranks, however probably not as bad as william potentially beating his kids. Micheal, even being the meanie he is at this point, probably wouldn't go tell his dad he wants to beat up bv together as his beatings may be real severe and probably still loves bv as family. William only seems to be angry at the run away kid because he doesn't beat up the couch person though.
-The bravery of the runaway kid does seem to not align with bv, however bv does at one point try to run towards the exit at fredbears (although fails). Also, this being before fnaf 4 83, could mean that BV is crying the way that he is now, because of "what he saw", perhaps sometime after he ran off. Maybe this could've triggered a change in micheal as well, making fun of how now bv is scared of the animatronics and acts like such a baby.
-Micheal's motivation is really trippy here also... Micheal supposedly ran off to go to bv's grave pile because he was having a rough day as he just lost his brother and he was burried. I don't wanna be that guy but I think Micheal is over reacting. BV died in a hospital, I'd assume he would've been around when bv was being burried and that Mike also could visit any time in the day but instead chooses to break a window in the middle of the night, and also it would seem strange for william keep mike from visiting bv's grave with N. Fredbear outside, unless fredbear is a guilt thing william put.
Thanks for reading my essay I subscribe u
this is a very good theory and something I never thought about, Michael going from no care in the world bully to "leave him be tonight" - it just does not make any sense. Although I think this theory would make more sense and would be better, I don't think it works (or at least not in THAT way) because Crying Child doesn't die first in the timeline, Henry states in the FNAF 6 ending monologue that this entire story all started from William killing Charlie - the wound first infected on him, so the only possible way this works is if this is later another night that ISN'T Charlie's death.
Just my thoughts, but great research and theory, subscribed :)
That’s not what Henry implies in his speech. He says he’s sorry he couldn’t help her that day like she helped the other spirits.
Plus Charlotte being the first death has the plot hole of William killing her for no reason. Yes in the novels he wants immortality and is jealous and what not, but in the games his family seems to be way more of a factor in his character, so him killing Charlotte to make Henry miserable like him fits way more.
@@siresquawks that is what is implied with his speech, quote "a wound first inflicted on me, but then one that I let bleed out to cause all of this." his daughter's death, an event that bled out and caused every event that followed
also William's motivation cannot be to make Henry miserable, because after he killed Henry's daughter he was successful in his goal and those motivations are settled, but he then creates robots in order to literally capture and murder children after said motivations are settled, to the point he loses one of his own - I genuinely do not think William has motivations in the games, not just because there's no good answer, but also because not all serial killers have any motivations and do just kill for no reason
Well in Williams history it is a wound first inflicted on Henry. But not the first incident in the series.
Also his motives were settled, until he sees the security puppet alive and tries to recreate it, causing the rest of the series.
Fnaf 2’s phone guy confirms the company knows about the Puppet’s sentience “it’s always thinking and it can go anywhere”. If he could get Charlotte to walk again, why can’t he get his son too?
I mean why would he be so specifically obsessed with remnant by making the funtimes if he had no motive related to it? Shouldn’t he just keep killing kids randomly? Why is there is so much lore built around the scooper and how it works and affects movement and life if Remnant wasn’t important to William and Henry?
If Williams goal wasn’t to control how something comes back to life, then sister location becomes pointless.
I feel like William only really makes sense when he’s a psychopath obsessed with trying to get his son to come back, and after he sees it can be done with Charlotte never stops trying to get it to happen the way he wants.
@@siresquawks with that remnant stuff I think it's safe to say it'd make more sense as Immortality or just some basic "mad science" stuff (as in no motivation again), because William does NOT care for his kids at all, he is an abusive person
Crying Child, not only does he spy on him, but after he discovers remnant via the funtimes, we see no attempt to bring him back at all, he just moves on to the other random kids - we also see in every FNAF 4 minigame Crying Child crying, and we only see William just keep doing his job and not caring at all, but also (possibly) leaves him trapped in the storage room
Michael, if we assume he's the FNAF 3 and 6 player, he is aggressively trying to kill him
Elizabeth, he is the most abusive towards (at least in the books) he slaps her constantly to the point this happens: "'Am I not enough?' she asked softly.'No, your not," He said firmly, looking away." - not to mention that he sent Michael down to "put her back together" which means it's entirely possible William knew that Elizabeth possessed Baby, so for the entire time Entertainment and Rentals was open, he not only leaves her down there and doesn't try to help, but also would allow random technicians to electrocute his daughter because he cares about her...? He also denies her wishes to go see Circus Baby who he's told is made just for her - which is a giant lie in itself - which is just because he's a bad father, if you look at the blueprints for Circus Baby she's the only animatronic who has an emergency stop feature, meaning he could've done that easily just so she could finally see Baby
I thought he cared for his kids and that's the whole reason the story unfolds how it does too, but as soon as I shared that I immedately got told why it's the complete opposite, so I remember the reasons vividly, and it proves he doesn't care, there is no timeline (even in the books where anything can happen) where he does
Yeah but a lot of events are subjective. Baby clearly cares about her dad enough to want to “make him proud”, and he took the effort to at least say not to go near baby (which is more than Silver Eyes William would).
Not to mention in its own way, Psychic Friend Fredbear is his way of keeping the Bite Victim safe, though in a serial killer control freak kind of way. And based on the fact that the Fnaf 4 nights are mirrored from Michael’s Fnaf 1 experiences, Michael’s connection to Nightmare Fredbear, and that William took Psychic friend Fredbear down with him into the secret room (implying that the Bite Victim is no longer alive, meaning he should still have it), it seems more like the secret room was made to keep track of and control Michael, who is a trouble maker who killed his younger brother.
Not to mention he basically sends Michael to his death for the events of sister location, implying William’s hatred is almost squarely focused on Michael in the game’s continuity.
And there’s the Vanessa Divorce story in Security Breach, where it’s mentioned she was manipulated by her dad to swing the custody battle in “Bill’s” Favor. Now why Vanessa seems to be Elizabeth could be any number of reasons, but point is, this implies that William still wanted custody of his kids.
Game William is a psychopath who wants control over everything in his life after his youngest son died.
Interestingly, Baby’s shock button is the only one in the game to seemingly not work all the time. It works on night 1, but not night 2 onwards. And hand unit specifically tries to get you to not go to her room for maintenance, implying that the fundamentals of the facility are biased in her favor.
William definitely isn’t a good parent, but he’s not just an asshole like the novel version. There are rules and behavior patterns shown in the series.
That kinda makes sense Michael only becomes a good or better person in the later games in a way
I don’t think Scott is changing the meaning, or adding meaning where it isn’t there. I’m pretty sure he’s just telling the same story from different perspectives.
Scott’s problem is that, after showing both sides, he wants his fandom to meet it in the middle, and they never do.
So instead of leaving it as is, he just retells the story in a new game. He’s been doing this ever since Fnaf 2. He does change things as he goes along, but each lore change could be an active effort to tell the same emotional story in a more clear way.
Edit: this is why he wrote all of those books in the first place. Think about it, it’s the same three themes explored in each book. The books are there to spell out the emotional aspect of this story. It’s not straight-forward, because emotions aren’t either.
I mean, we also know micheal has a mom due to... well, biology.
Great video.
Last week while my whole family, myself included, were sick as dogs with a stomache bug, and I spent a day and a half in bed, and the whole time my brain was fixated on the issue of midnight motorist. The explanations all fell into one of two categories:
1. Mustard Man is William and person in room is crying child. The problem here is that it makes the whole mini game pointless. It gives us absolutely no new or even interesting information. We already know William is a controlling father and crying child has a fixation on a specific place. What would be the point of making midnight motorist if the scene it contained didn't say anything?
2. Just the opposite. A theory so wild and out of left field and completely speculative that there's no plausible way it fits alongside the other fnaf 6 easter eggs, which are all fairly close to known source material.
I buy almost everything you say which is very gratifying since the mystery has bugged me for so long, as I've never considered it "solved". My big reservation is that the theory is predicated on the assumption that Mustard Man is William Afton. Everyone's identity in the theory is projected off of that presumption, and that presumption is based solely off of what? The car? and that's it? Meanwhile, I frankly just don't quite buy William Afton as a drunk getting kicked out of a bar and bullying his kids. Even as Scraptrap, decades later, most of that being twisted as a permanently tortured spirit grafted to a series of bear traps that resemble a bunny, William's dialogue is reserved, intelligent, and...... patient.
"What a deceptive calling. I knew it was a lie the moment I heard it, obviously. But it is intriguing nonetheless."
As a tortured spirit zombie walking in a bunny robot, he's still calm and collected enough to recognize a trap, analyze it, walk into the trap on purpose, and mess with the person trying to trap him. Presumably before becoming Springtrap, Afton was even *more* calm and collected. The drunk driver kicked out of a bar to go home and argue with the kids just..... doesn't strike me as in character. Remember, this quote was written for the same game as midnight motorist, so this is how Scott thought of William at that time.
That said I think this is far and away the best theory I've ever heard on the subject. It fits, contributes to backstory which is what fruity maze did in the same game, and isn't so wild and out there that it would require three games of its own to explore. Thanks for the work.
Listen that Mrs Afton bit could be complete B.S but I'm so happy just because it actually acknowledges that scene because that has been burning in my head for years now
Of course its bs, Scott debunked the importance of the mother character. She left the family before Fnaf events
Speaking from experience, older brothers can be assholes one minute and then caring the next. So that's not a particularly heavy point, but you might be on to something.
Interesting, I have small issues, but I think the gist works.
this is a nice theory, i always enjoy hearing people's theories on midnight motorist considering it's still a bump in the rug in most people's understandings of the game lore. i hear a lot of people making the argument that it's not michael watching tv, and while i personally disagree with that, it's still interesting to hear who people think it is
I actually thought the same thing, with both midnight motorist, and Williams motive for killing Charlie, though I theorize that there is way more to it than just jealousy
I honestly have no idea how I never thought of this. C.C. being the one who really away to "that place" (what me and most people who believed it was C.C. thought was fredbears) makes no sense since he is known for hating fredbears. Also, I don't think the animatronic was Nighmare fredbears since he has 4 toes like others said in the comments. Golden Freddy has three toes so it could have been him which might also mean C.C. possesses fredbear with cassidy since there isn't a reason for cassidy to go to the Afton household AND they most likely wouldn't even know where it is.
i think someone made a similar theory the only difference (which i agree with) is that the foot prints outside are from golden freddy/crying child which makes sense because golden freddy is either an illusion or can teleport because in fnaf 2 when you put the mask on he fades away
I mean idk if he's an illusion. Multiple people can see him and we know that since jeremy fitzgerald is definitely a different person than michael afton. I agree that golden freddy could have been there. An interesting thing to point out is one of the fazbear frights novels talk about these glasses with an illusion of ballora whenever you put the glasses on. But she interactes with the world as she can move leaves and stuff. Maybe golden freddy is similar in this way? Idk just some speculation.
Glad that FNaF is still booming in 2022
Dude, you have shattered my vision on FNaF 4 and 2. I’m about to reconstruct my lore on the franchise now.
"I don’t think anyone knows who Mendo is"
Me, who remembers the shopkeepers from FNaF World: Guess I don’t exist
Excellent, now I don't have to wrack my brain anymore trying to figure out Midnight Motorist!
Good theory! However I feel like the mother would be crying over her son on the day of the bite. Michael would be watching TV trying to distract his brain from the horrible disaster
6:16 i am so sorry but this has been bugging me, i seriously love your video- it clears more stuff up than matpat did in his theory videos but I’m desperate to know what fnaf ost this is
It's dave's battle theme from dayshift at freddy's.
@@siresquawks aa, thank you sm
also if Mom is grey, then that's her half of the genes in Mike - he sounds like her a bit?
like, I looked like my dad as a baby, and my personality is more my dad but I look like my mom now.
To put the nail on the coffin to confirm this (if you hate using the books for theories dont read this comment):
On the 8th Fazbear Frights book Gumdrop Angel, the third story called What We Found is about Hudson, who in his childhood got abused by his father, and now has found a job as a night guard at a place named Fazbear Frights, which is the FNaF 3 location. During one of his night shifts, he sees an animatronic, Springtrap. During another night shift (or the same, I really don't remember the story that much), Springtrap starts attacking him, while either Springtrap says things that Hudson's father used to say, or Hudson is imagining Springtrap saying things that his father used to say. Because Springtrap is William Afton, and in the story Springtrap is saying things Hudson's father used to say when abusing Hudson, to me that feels like a parallelism with William and Michael, and if in the story Hudson is kind of like Mike, and Hudson got abused, that probably means that Michael was abused by his father.
Personally, I think the "illusion" was created by CC, it'd just make sense
I miss in the old ways when we thought Afton's kids were created through mitosis and that's why they look so much like him when they get older.
Underrated, this looks like it will blow up tho remember me when you're famous
Ngl, this popped up in my feed and i expected it to be half-assed, but nah, this was a well made theory/video, good shit man 🤙
What if the house is the one we see in the fnaf 4 title screen where the aftons moved away from Freddy’s after the crying child died or maybe to be closer to his grave site
Imagine not ever knowing what fnaf is before watching this video
Do you think this clip and the opening screen / gameplay from FNAF4 suggest Afton always, literally, had animatronics around the house? Because I feel like the events of FNAF4 aren't just dreams, but memories of things actually being around the house.
I always thought the person sitting on the couch was mrs Afton and the person who ran away was Michael
It could be Henry
Really good theory! One thing that's been really bugging me (even though I 100% agree with your theory): who do you think the main character in fnaf 4 is? There seems to be some very strong implications that the person is the crying child: note that the fnaf 4 POV shows they were only as high as the bed, the room had lots of toys and there were a vase of flowers as well as an IV stand next to the bed.
Inarguably the crying child was the original intended player of 4. But I feel that Scott had to move it towards Mike as the player later when Dream theory was retconned (a video topic I'm working on).
@@siresquawks Might want to be careful about this, because Scott's reddit post (the one about retconning) says in an edit at the bottom that the retcon was a seamless integration; michael being the fnaf 4 protagonist rather than the crying child is definitely not seamless.
Also, relooking at the evidence I provided, I think the IV bag/vase of flowers can be explained by what matpat said in his latest theory, which is further supported that those objects appear out of nowhere randomly when you turn to the bed (indicative that it's an illusion, though the logistics of that seem weird, so maybe a hallucination). Further evidence for the pov being michael is the crying child room =/= the fnaf 4 game room (though i'm pretty sure cartography in the games is a bit screwed up lmao, at least the main details seem to be very absent (two doors, bed away from door, no closet etc.)).
Couter-point to this (and thus evidence for dream theory) is what fingertrap (very clearly mirroring springtrap) as well as chica's missing beak (called out by scott, so very clearly representing fnaf 2) are doing in a cutscene of the past. So you could be right, idk.
I hope you make more FNAF lore videos! I love your perspective on things!
Im sorry, but wasnt this like the first theory about midnight motorist ?
People first thought it was Miss Afton first before it being Michael.
But the watching tv as a memory seems pretty legit. And yea the kid that ran away definitely isnt crying Child.
I think my original comment here got deleted. I made a Reddit post about just this over a year ago. Yeah, it’s definitely a story of an abusive dad and a rebellious teenage son. Look up on the FNAF subreddit “A different view of Midnight Motorist” (I don’t think RUclips likes links in comments). I don’t agree that the person at the chair is the mom though it’s possible. The character looks bald to me so I just say they aren’t anybody important (uncle Afton). And I think the footsteps outside aren’t from Nightmare Fredbear but rather Shadow Freddy who says “Follow Me” in the FNAF 3 mini games and in the twisted ones. Good video.
Another thing to note that’s a problem for this video is the sprite name of the person in the chair. It’s “mansitting.png.”
To be fair about the baldness every human sprite of kids is also bald
@@dumbly-stupid True, except for the FNAF 4 ones
@@sageseraph5035 yeah and Elizabeth but those sprites are also more detailed
i like how every character archetype dies, but they also keeps coming back lol
I'd like to propose a question, are you actually Michael in FNAF 4? It would explain the fact that Nightmare Fredbear haunts him outside his window (and in my theory) in his dreams, and other references to FNAF 4 in other games
it's the memory of what he did to his brother fucking with him and giving him the nightmares of the Nightmares
idk
I was actually going to say this in an earlier version of the script, but yeah pretty much.
The Nightmares also attack with very similar patterns to the FNAF1 animatronics. Also, you can hear a backwards version of a phone guy message at random points during the nightmare. We're definitely Michael in FNAF4. The timeline is the only question.
What little signs there are seem to point to during the events of FNAF1. Perhaps Michael is being influenced by his brother. If there's any truth to the idea that William was messing with the CC's head as well and making him see these things, then maybe CC is showing Michael what happened to him, and that's what truly starts off Michael's journey into discovering what his father has done.
But that's just me, as I'm of the firm belief that the FNAF1 location was Michael's first job (Jeremy and Fritz are just Jeremy and Fritz), and SL came later.
I think the purple guy being orange in this minigame means that he isn't in the iconic purple uniform at the time, cuz why would he, this is after the fredbear pizzeria shenanigans and before he'd take the purple uniform again for his devious schemes
This is my favourite FNAF theory for now.
Bro Im so dumb I always thought yellow guy was saying the person on the couch had a bad day, I just now realized it was the other way around
All I know is that its 80’s music playing in that mini game.
But I fully agree with this. Mike is strong enough to break that glass window and run out. But the steps of the animatronic throw me off. Ooooor. The other window is CC room and when Mike saw the animatronic in the window and bam. Busted window.
Idk, but for me quote about "rough day" wasn't something that person watching TV said. I've always considered it as thought that "narrator" or Williams says to himself when trying to approach this person.
Why wouldn’t it be Orange then? Why is it grey? Also Scott’s never done internal thought in the games.
I always thought it was Michael because he went to that place again was him going where he last saw his little bro
"The Shadow fears me" is NMF's most-interesting line _by far_ and I've questioned its meaning for a while now. I tried to make it work for Shadow Freddy/Bonnie, since that's the most literal association we have with the word 'shadow', but it... doesn't really make sense.
And... Once again I'm first to reply.
banana
@@NICK-a terracotta pie
I hope Sire Squawks see's this comment I've seen a couple vids now and I love your ability to not just stick to what's been agreed on or what been agreed been to complicated and how you can effectively use your best guesses to come to satisfying conclusions that's what I loved about fnaf theories but until recent the community especially for fnaf SB has had real bad tunnel vision this and with theory's like these coming from you fuhnaff and Ozone new life in the franchise is flourishing and new ideas concepts and theories are hella fun (side note Scott admits he retcons things all the time so I love love love that you agree and think a lot like me when examining previous things we could not understand at the time) aside from that keep up the good work you just earned a new sub bro
I remember just before FNAF 4 released (might've been just after), Scott said he'd only done one real retcon and that he didn't like the idea of retconning things willy-nilly. It seems a bit strange that he would now admit to 'retconning things all the time'.
9:30 entitled? she just wanted an ice cream, idk if getting got by the claw is a proportionate punishment 😂 i'm just joking though, this is an awesome vid !
*That* music started playing while I was playing DSaF 3, so that is a coincidence I guess.
Tbh I always thought that "he's had a rough day" line was Will's thoughts, and that Mike is the couch guy (based off the solid evidence that Mike likes watching TV in SL lol) and explains why Will can't interact with Mike any further during the minigame.
Mike's had a rough day, Will's going to leave him alone. 🤷♂️
There’s no reason to think it’s this. Colors match people in MM. and the ult guide says the couch person is the one speaking to William.
Micheal Motorist
It's cool seeing this video validated through fnafs biggest mouthpieces magnum opus lol.
Well he has the same text colour as the foxybro,although I agree Mike is the runaway kid since I believe mike is BV, but if Williams text colour matches why not the foxybrother?
Ehh, depending on what you count as William's dialouge the color does change a lot. Psychic Friend Fredbear's dialogue can range from yellow to white, while his 6 dialogue is much more of an orange.
The nightmare illusion call was such a good one. Recent book backed you up
This is a great theory I’ve always viewed it as a missing kid being lured by William and we’re a parent upset at him
This is the best MM theory I've heard by far. Non of the others mentioned the hidden area with the stones, and your interpretation is awesome. Congrats dude, I hope your theory gets more views, even Matpat, cause I think you're right dude
This was my immediate assumption back when FNAF 6 was released. I just figured it was the mum. It sounded like a typical mum response.
Someone acually thought this minigame shows bite victim(probably Evan) running away and the person watching tv was Michaell?I knew person watching tv is Ms Afton and the one who run away is Mike since 2017,this theory makes so much sense that after 5 years i still take it as a fact
I freaked out as soon as I heard the Dsaf music
There was an idea awhile ago that William killed Henry’s daughter because Henry knew how to infuse animatronics with remnant or some sort of life or had a theory about doing so and then when Williams kids died he asked Henry for help and when Henry said no he took his kid away so he’d be more willing to do it or would do something that William would be able to replicate I know it probably doesn’t fit with the lore cause nothing does but I thought it was a fun thought to add
Idk these are a bit of a reach. Its hard to assume conversations happening with them unless we have proof from the games about it. For example with this video, there are a few little connections and assumptions, but they fit with the story of this minigame.
Fuhnaff mentioned about the glass scraps on Security Breach which made me rethink this Midnight Motorist. I don't agree that someone went out from the inside but rather something from the outside went inside the house. Why? If you check the back of the house, there's no glasses below the window out of the house.
If you break the window from the inside, the glasses would be outside. If you break glass outside, glass shards would be inside the house. Question. Do you see any glass outside the house in midnight motorist? No? Then that meant someone from the outside went inside that house.
Wouldn't william see michael in his room then? And even if something broke inside the room and took michael, what happned then?
Bro-
Michael killed his little brother.
William (the orange guy In the minigame) said “lets leave him alone tonight” because he has been relentlessly blaming him for Evans death.
Jr’s is fnaf 2 location where William killed Henry’s daughter because he wants Henry to be as miserable as he is. We know this because Henry built the Security puppet to protect his daughter. And the only known location with the puppet is fnaf 2.
Issues with this. The person on the couch is the one saying “leave him alone, he’s had a rough day”, not William.
Secondly, the second half of midnight motorist is called “Later that Night” in the game files. This means the mini game happens after Security Puppet since the ending of that minivan segways into the start of “Later that night”.
William can’t drive him from where he killed Charlotte, and then midway on his was home pass the building where he killed Charlotte.
That’s like killing someone in LA, then driving to New York, and then someone says “they must be driving by their crime scene” when the reach the completely unrelated Las Vegas city.
Likewise, as I said in the video, William just killed Charlotte. And we know he never got caught, and still was able to make the Funtime Animatronics, so he’s still apart of the company. Meaning if Jrs was Fnaf 2 Freddy’s then he would still be allowed to go there.
Not to mention this mini game is set around the Fredbear Era, meaning the unknown Fnaf location after Fredbear’s and before 2 likely hasn’t happened, and Fnaf 2 hasn’t happened.
@@siresquawks I surrender mr. Squawks🙏 you’re right, im wrong.
The only problem with the person watching tv being the mom is that they refer to them as he
no, that's the person on the couch speaking about the person who ran away, we don't know their gender.
So, just gonna toss it out here, Afton made Bellora in his wife's image but Bellora is not his wife's soul, as far as we know none of the animatronics in Sister Location outside of Circus Baby are full on possessed. There's never been any victims names associated with them and the Security Puppet never granted them souls like she did the core cast members, especially since Sister Location is a prequel.
Then again the games are notoriously hard to tell who is possessed, who's just glitching, and who's an advanced AI, like seriously, we know of like 8 actual possessions and everyone else is just a fucking mystery.
The song that Ballora sings is mighty sus, though. It's not a song that you would willingly program into an animatronic meant to serve at parties, and Ballora sings this song at night when she's at the Sister Location, IE, _not_ at a party like she's bored and has nothing else to do.
@@Dhalin I don't see why a psychopathic kid killing narcissist wouldn't program that kind of song into the robot facsimile of his wife. Further the song isn't really even that bad, we can infer those lyrics to mean a whole lot of things, lastly we don't even know if they were programmed into her.
The animatronics are capable of speaking, they can synthesize speech, what's to say Ballora isn't just singing her own lyrics?
@@boanoah6362exactly, robots can have their own mind too, and robots are programmed often to sound a specific way and have a specific personality, just look at the Mimic, many of us would never know that Glitchtrap/Burntrap is a mimic (if Scott would have never implied it) because of how well he acts as William, he copied him really well and you would really think that it's actually William because of how advanced the technology of the future has become. It could make you feel confused about what's real and what isn't (just look at Blade Runner which takes place in the near future just like the events after Help Wanted, remember how the main protagonist tried to deceive himself into believing that his wife is a real human despite being only a digital pre programmed recreation?). Even if Ballora is possessed, she isn't possessed by an adult but rather, another victim child just as Scott himself confirmed or she is a hybrid soul like Ennard
wait- did anyone actually thought that the person in the couch was Michael? I thought the consensus back in the day was that the son who broke out was him-
Great theory, but it raises some questions:
1) Was Elizabeth the first one to die then?
In the fnaf 4 minigames you can enter a room that looks like Elizabeth's, but she's nowhere to be seen, so she must be dead already.
In order, it would look like this: Elizabeth's dead, followed by Crying child's and then Henry's daughter.
but she was killed by circus baby, so...
2) Did Afton build the funtime animatronics before any of the events of Fnaf 4 Minigames?
I might just be confused at this point, the timeline is complicated :P
No. After replaying the start of Sister Location, the game says that Sister Location was made after the closure of Freddy Fazbear's pizza (Though Doesn't specify which) meaning that during the early points in the timeline, there isn't a Freddy's to close. Only Fredbear's. So, Elizabeth might just be in one of the many rooms we can assume exist but can't access in this minigame. Obviously, the Afton house has more than 2 rooms, so it's not unreasonable to assume there's at least one or two more that Elizabeth could be in, asleep or something.
@@siresquawks fair enough... didn't thought about that
I have been just explaning to my friend the fnaf lore, and I realized that this minigame makes no sense. If thats Evan
, Micheal and William in the house, this COULDNT happen after Charlie was killed, that happened after Evan died...so yeah wtf xdd
You’re wrong about midnight motorist! *proceeds to recycle every theory ever*
Except ones used by the largest theory channels on the platform that people bitch at me on Freddit for if I ever treat it as fact. If this is how you thought about it, congrats. Thanks for being on my side. Also, the title is a game theory parody so what did you expect?
I have a personal problem with saying that low that came out of nowhere, because Funtime foxy could be said to come out of nowhere in that game as well, both being in sister location
The person on the couch and Michael from FNaF 4 have the same dialogue color. That’s a very important detail that I doubt Scott would include by accident, also him sitting on his chair and watching TV signifies that it is indeed Michael, also in Security Breach the Mother is displayed in Blue and Purple coloring (Ballora’s colors funnily enough) while the person on the chair is in gray, which is Michael’s color from FNaF 4. Not a bad theory but I doubt it’s actually true.
They actually don’t. It is grey, but when you compare them they don’t look much alike. This is an even greater difference than something like Fredbear’s dialogue changing.
Mike’s is far darker than couch person’s.
You are on the same wavelength as MatPat
He wasn’t for years. This video was considered anti-Matpat until very recently.
@@siresquawks well yeah, but now he is following your ideas, which is interesting
it's not an Afton it's just a random kid that got kidnapped/lured away by Spring Bonnie and you play as the drunk dad coming home to discover this. that's why the game has you swerve all over the road, that's why the bar, that's why the 'don't be hard on him'. Green man isn't Henry; he's a bartender/bouncer/bar owner who kicks the drunk guy out.
it's the exact same concept with Fruity Maze and Susie and I don't see ya'll saying Susie's an Afton. William took kids that were probably really easy to convince to follow him.
The difference is Susie’s is an MCI kid. She died in Freddy’s, and was lured IN Freddy’s.
This would require Afton to walk through the rain in the moisture prone spring lock suits to kidnap some random kid for no reason. What’s the relevance of this minigame if that’s the plot?
This kid isn’t golden Freddy because then the 5th MCI kid becomes pointless.
Not to mention the kid leads their own footprints and the animatronics stop several feet away, and are only a single pair.
Not to mention this secret half of the mini game is called “Later that night” following up directly from Charlotte’s death in Security puppet, where care tracks drive off. This minigame starts with someone driving off. (See video on Nightmare Fredbear explanation).
Not to mention, as shown in the private room in sister location, William is a control freak over his household. Explaining why he gets so pissed at the kid running away.
And here’s a theory that didn’t make it into the video (Which I doubt you watched): Nightmare Fredbear in UCN has the power to turn invisible. This would explain the single set of footprints. He’s still there, just invisible because afton turned off scary nightmare bear mode when he got back.
William being orange guy is cannon. This isn’t a theory. It’s story telling from within the game itself.
@@siresquawks lmao tell me when you publish that novel and I'll read it.
I don't watch MatPat or really many other theory videos. It's already ruined the series so great job. I just see Occam's Razor and remember that Scott's a crappy storyteller. Simple as.
So Springbonnie went outside on a raining night? Knowing that he would die? To kill a random kid without reason? That's stupid
my explaination :
this was michael who escaped due to william being abusive due to michael murdering the crying child at the bite of '83 so michael escapes to the pizzaria so he can see henry and see what's happening with the place so later on idk
Question that just popped in my head. Did crying child and Charlie die at the same party?
Probably not, as this would mean that William Kills charlotte, drives home and Michael is somehow there (regardless of whether you believe my theory or not, most theories would have Michael on the couch in some capacity). Even if Fredbears is in Walking distance Michael shouldn't be able to run faster than his dad can drive.
I guess I’m thinking along the lines of crying child dying at the same time Charlie is locked outside (part of why no one notices her). I wouldn’t expect William to come strait home. He just killed a kid, he would need time to cover his tracks, maybe bury a body. It also seems weird that they would let those older kids bully crying child if his parents were around. Unless, the dad said he would be there while he was busy killing Charlie. It would be poetic, both of Afton’s kids being dead due to his love of murder. That would place midnight motorist as later that night from the horrific evening both families experienced.