Something to note about the the Take Cake to the Children minigame is that the crying child is referred to as male.

@notrealnamenotatall2476

Жыл бұрын

Oh, now that’s interesting!

I wish that the fnaf story line went like Squimpus McGrimpus' analog series: the crying child was William Aftons youngest son and the one he loved the most, due to this Michael became jealous and began bullying him horribly. Then on the crying childs' birthday he dies in a freak accident when his brother shoved him into Fredbears' mouth. William is so angry at Michael that he wants to genuinely kill him. However, it would be easy for people to know it was him... So, instead, he takes out his anger onto other children at Freddy Fazbears' pizza. This is also why he kills Henrys' daughter. He's jealous of their loving relationship. "If I can't have my child, neither can you." So to speak

@Pygargue00fr

Жыл бұрын

This would have been perfect, no mad scientist needed. Just pure anger and hatred

@andreimihail3677

Жыл бұрын

@@Pygargue00fr unfortunatelly bot only is he a mad scientist, he didn't love his kids either

@uli_Gio

Жыл бұрын

This could be the plot of the movie

@Takejiro24

Жыл бұрын

That reminds me: did Joseph (the name given to C.C. for Squimpus' series) ever have any active involvement on the plot since he declared revenge on Michael, believing that Michael was trying to say that "he (Joseph) does not exist"?

@lxi..

Жыл бұрын

@@Takejiro24 not really no, I think he was just a foil to Charlies' positivity that Michael would free them all

hidden numbers in the promotional art for fnaf4 clearly shoes the numbers 87, then progressivly got changed into 82, then 83 as the game's release grew closer, so yeah this WAS the bite of 87, but got changed. and when you think about it, it even got implied in the games before, a bite, a bear and a child.

@StxrryGxlxxies

Жыл бұрын

A bit late, but, if you search up some videos about Mangle’s voice, you can see subtitles on some and one of them has the subtitles “We have a little boy, with no frontal lobe..”

@Pygargue00fr

Жыл бұрын

@@StxrryGxlxxies I heard about that. You see, a lot of people have wondered if the nights in fnaf 2 happened AFTER the bite. Here's why: the phoneguy's recordings are from summer, however the payecheck is in november, second: the place just looks.... abandonned. The walls and floor are dirty, there's wires hanging from the ceilings, the mangle speaks about a kid with no frontal lobe (I'll come back to it) and finally There's birthday decorations everywhere. It all makes sense in a way. Prehaps whoever we play as is either charged of keeping an eye on the place while they relocate everything or just sneaked in (altrough Michael Afton was not an established character back then, so it couldn't have been him when the game came out. But it you take into account how much the story changed and evolved, it might be him, now.) Now for the victim, we always believed it to be an adult for a hell of a lot of differznt reasons. However it's simply wasn't the case. Here's something I wondered. In fnaf one, when typing 1987 in the custom night mode results in a golden freddy jumpscare. In fnaf 3's happiest day minigame, (wich seems more related to one specific child, we have, a kid with a golden freddy mask and a birthday. And it fnaf 4, once again, a kid, a yellow bear and a birthday. Every time, it's the same thing, exept for fnaf 2, wich makes me wonder, why would scott hint us with golden freddy in fnaf 1, change it in fnaf 2, then go back to it afterwards in fnaf 3 and 4? Well, what if he didn't changed it, what if he just messed up with the wrighting in fnaf 2, then presumably opted for the "mangle did it to an adult" after fnaf 4 when he reworked the story? We know scott is the type to go back on what he says just cause he didn't meant it, like how the plot of fnaf 4 wich was probably the dream theory at the time, was just redconned out of existence.

@StxrryGxlxxies

Жыл бұрын

@@Pygargue00fr I don’t exactly know what to say, but, you make very good points! I was one of the people back in the day who believed the Nightguard Jeremy Fitzgerald had gotten bitten in The Bite of ‘87, and now, I’ve twisted that thought COMPLETELY on it’s head, and actually came up with a new theory myself, it’ll be below in case you want to hear it! :) So, basically, The Bite of ‘87, the one in FNAF 2, never happened. Only The Bite of ‘83, since that’s what it is now, however, if we were talking in past terms, yeah, The Bite of ‘83 didn’t exist and The Bite of ‘87 did, only to the Crying Child. But I do personally believe that, Scott made a whole new story, different than that of FNAF 1-4, and just decided not to actually update the games to fit in with the new story, proof? The Phone Guy phone calls, of course! Like you said, Phone Guy talks about The Bite of ’87, despite everything pointing to it being The Bite of ‘83, which means Scott didn’t update the game to make a different voice line for him, saying it was The Bite of ‘83, that’s just my theory though :) (Just realized I went extremely off topic :v) (Edit: A line I wanted to become bold didn’t become bold, lol)

@Pygargue00fr

Жыл бұрын

@@StxrryGxlxxies and we have a winner! Jokes aside, finally someone gets it. You see, fnaf 4 was going to be the end, but after it's release, Scott stated that he changed the Story in major ways for Sister location, adding in the aftons and shifting from 87 to 83, along many other things, that's why the story became so difficult to understand, the original games, while a solid base for everything, cannot fully line up with what we have now because they tried to tell a different story. Now, in fnaf 4's case, that story was heavily implied by Scott in a 2015 GameTheory live stream that the Dream Theory was, at the time, the awnser to it all, basicly, it states that all games prior(fnaf 1 to 3) never happened, but are instead creations out of the mind of crying child, then the fnaf 4 nights happening when he's at the hospital dying. The nightmares representing his fears that he has to fight and conquer to move on to the afterlife, Nightmare presumably being death itsefr or something along the lines. As for the box, we know that we would have originaly got one of two keys in the fun with plushtrap minigames(while the other MAYBE with the balloon boy variant, cause it was originaly going to ship at launch.) What was inside the box at that time? We aren't sure, but according tp Scott it's "all the pieces combined" something that would have comfirmed the dream theory. From the perspective of Scott. This wasn't going to pass for the community who indeed rejected it in the end. So he had no choice but to change everything in a way. That and there is still some loose ends and unawnsered questions, like for instance who or what was the fredbear plush at the time? And what about the "I will put you back together" line, where do they fit if the dream theory was indeed the truth at that time? It's still hard to say as many newer fans of the series and old ones alike still refuse to aknoledhe the fact that the story changed and evolved. Wich makes it hard to find the many truths As a bonus: here's a few other lore pieces from back then that are either debunked or could still have a place in the current timeline: 'The killer was the Phoneguy: if you take the original trilogie, it's very implied that it might have actually been the case at some point. At least in the first two games. The third makes it impossible cause they don't die at the same time but, somehow still implies it in a way. Either Scott messed up or he delibarally changed stuff -Shadow freddy is a representation of the killer: The suit of the killer, with the color that's generally associates with him, big white eyes and everything. By the way, the color purple, at least for purple guy, represents that he's hiding in the shadows. Back in the original trilogie he was just a background character and nothing more, no real identity (exept of course the phoneguy paradox), only being there as the psycho child killer. This is also probably why shadow freddy wasn't brought back into the new games, fnaf 2 and 3 implying the killer used both springlock suits.

@StxrryGxlxxies

Жыл бұрын

@@Pygargue00fr Yeah exactly! Ever since I saw the “Crying Child WAS the Puppet (SAVE HIM)” video, I’ve always now thought to NOT use games 1-4 as evidence for ANYTHING, since they aren’t accurate at all to the new story. I heard about Dream Theory, but that was like 3, 4 or 5 years ago since I’ve even seen that livestream, and I haven’t even seen all of it, so I barely remembered it. Didn’t know it was supposed to be canon though! I also never thought that the Nightmares could’ve been interpretations for death, but that’s actually really smart! And I never knew that you actually had the chance to open the box originally, I’m going to assume this came from the Dawko interview? Though I don’t know (really gotta watch that interview lmao). Personally, I believe in the original story now that they are nightmares, because it does seem like it! For right now though in the current story, I believe they are either robots or agony, based on my own personal theories (the agony theory based on a logbook number that was out of place and some weird math, though I don’t know anymore since it’s such a stretch I did, but I did find that translating a lot of out of place numbers in the logbook to numbers that have meanings or angel meanings fits eerily well with characters like Elizabeth and the MikeBro theory, though I couldn’t find the Crying Child number again that fit him well, if you’re wondering though, it said something like “your dreams will become a reality” but yeah lmao). My personal opinion on what the box has changed to now, is that it’s the 3 stories Scott has made, you don’t have to believe there’s 3 stories, but it’s my fault for watching Game Theory to now believe there’s a new story that’s all about how FNAF 1-UCN was a lie and a game made by a rogue indie developer 💀. Yeah, I do wonder where those lines fit in, and I completely understand why Scott changed the story, he didn’t want the fans to be unhappy, but I’d love if he could come out and say there’s like, 3 separate stories and which story takes place in what game(s) 💀. It is really unfortunate that new and old fans of the series DO refuse to admit the story has changed, I may be one of (I think?) the older fans who know it definitely has changed. Didn’t come in too early to the story though, and the whole part where I came in is probably the reason I like the 2nd story more lol, but I would still LOVE to see a continuation on the original story, because that plot idea was so neat! Funnily enough, I do believe the killer IS the Phone Guy in the original story still, it just feels like it’d work out too well, but yeah, the differences in the way they died is weird. I could only imagine that maybe, he faked dying or something like how Phone Guy himself suggested, then they were about to put him in the Freddy suit but then he fled or something, came back later to destroy them and actually died for good this time? I don’t know, just random speculation lol. Never thought of that point though of the Phone Guy is the killer theory, about how their deaths are different, so, thanks! :) Never actually knew about that one, that’s actually a really interesting theory, as they’re one of the only characters that’s colored purple, and IS the first original purple Freddy. Makes me think though, if Springbonnie really was the Purple Guy’s creation back in the day and made Bonnie purple to resemble that he himself was the PURPLE Guy, THE murderer. I don’t know though, that speculation is more likely for the 2nd story, lmao, but that is a really interesting theory about Shadow Freddy! Never thought of the idea that he could’ve used both, but in hindsight, it seems obvious because one was identified as THE murderer suit. Great theory! :) (Edit: Forgot to space out a section to make it easier to read-)

I always thought that the "1983" in the "Fredbear and Friends" ad was the date it released, making it more plausible that the fredbear bite is the "Bite of '87"

@andruspolanco6935

Жыл бұрын

There a lot of times where Scott said that there are 2 bites

@gamerdomain6618

Жыл бұрын

@@andruspolanco6935 Doesn't change the fact that it made good sense.

@andruspolanco6935

Жыл бұрын

@@gamerdomain6618 what,the thing of the date of the ad of when it was released? yes it makes sense but in fnaf it doesn't with all the other evidence

@gamerdomain6618

Жыл бұрын

@@andruspolanco6935 This video was literally made considering only the first four games where we didn't have that kind of context; it _made_ sense in the context of the video and time before Sister Location; doesn't mean it fits into the modern lore, but neither does this entire video.

@andruspolanco6935

Жыл бұрын

@@gamerdomain6618 but it was confirmed since fnaf 4 that it's the bite of 83 with the amount of the evidence at the time, that's why Scott put 1983 for the people that still believed that it was the bite of 87 😐

Yeah back in the day the bite of 83 kinda is what made me say “fuck this shit im out”. And why Im not too surprised by sb falling back on the same gimicks as the past (two purple guys, two vanessas and too many jeremies). I can definitely understand why people are miffed with pizzasim despite actually liking it in a vacuum because for once it does the magical narrative technique of being upfront with its story. Sure it had some stuff (scraptrap, mustard man, baby, and the insanity ending) and relied on a massive retcon, but I just was happy (at the time) for anything conclusive. I was hoping this would mark the end of these games hyperfixation on the aftons and more on the victims and their parents. Too bad peepaw went and screwed up that hope. I swear to god its absolutely luny that dsaf actually tackles the most horrifying part of the missing kids better than the main games because it actually acknowledges the tragedy rather than leaving stuff so convoluted its hard to tell that a tragedy even happened. Like sb they completely forget to mention if gregory is in a life or death situation and only mentions people going missing in absolute last possible moment before immediately forget about it.

@ExValeFor

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, lol, I'm surprised so many people still took the story seriously post FNAF4. I checked out when it was just a different unconnected Bite of-. Like this just sets the precedent that any established event you think you know of can be something totally different - and if you think you know something, nah, you don't. The franchise went exactly into that direction from there.

Something that I just realized about the bite shown in FNAF 4 is that, when you really think about it, it doesn't make sense for it to have ever been the bite of '87 in the first place. Think about it: the bite is implied to be what caused the animatronics' free-roam feature to be discontinued, which implies either that an animatronic attacked someone, or that it failed to account for someone standing in front of it while doing a routine (I could imagine an animatronic leaning down and moving its jaw as part of a stand-up comedy routine, and accitentally biting someone who happened to be where its mouth would end up.) What we see in FNAF 4, however, is a child's head being intentionally shoved into a stationary animatronic's mouth by another person. The animatronic's free-roam ability had nothing to do with the bite (assuming the Fredbear animatronic ever had it in the first place,) so why would it result in the free-roam feature being disabled?

@emmetstanevich2121

Жыл бұрын

That being said, it could have been initially intended to show the bite of '87, and the story could have been changed during development, but we won't be able to know for sure unless Scott outright confirms or denies it himself. As it stands, however, the cutscene shown in the final game could not be depicting the bite of '87.

@Lo0serx3

Жыл бұрын

​@@emmetstanevich2121late response, but to add to what you say here: there's a phone call in FNAF 2 where the phone guy says that a position on the day shift opened up, but doesn't get specifics as to why. but since the game is set in 1987, I think it's safe to assume that the person in the bite of 87 was an employee. if that's the case, since the animatronics were acting funky, it leads into what you were saying about the free roam. sucks we never saw it on screen, but I think this is less a case of retconning and more "this is a thing that is likely to happen multiple times over the years" (as far as the bite goes, I'm back and forth on puppet being crying child)

@macayleangelina9892

6 ай бұрын

Exactly what I was thinking.

I'm still mad about the box There is literally nothing in it. People have scoured the code and there is absolutely nothing that is either unlinked to anything and unexplained, or directly linked to the box.

“ Was that the bite of 87’?! “ has a whole new meaning now.

@Dave_Miller_TP

Жыл бұрын

Why, hello there, old sport

@who_dis3224

Жыл бұрын

Oh shit whaddup, Dave!

@Dave_Miller_TP

Жыл бұрын

@@oldsport9136 nah me and sportsy got the drip. He has the top hat I have the jacket.

@Dave_Miller_TP

Жыл бұрын

@@who_dis3224nothin much

A man works as a night guard for a sleazy business. His coworker dies. He gets fired after a week and disappears into the night. A restaurant chain opens a new location! It's the eighties. Turns out, this restaurant chain will fall from grace, get rid of their fancy new toys, and refurbish their old, trusted mascots. Five children die. It is remarkable that a human can survive without a frontal lobe. After his son dies in malfunctioning machinery, a man murders five children. His son, now haunting a robot, guides the five to new bodies. When his father returns and destroys those bodies, the vengeful spirits intimidate the man into falling victim for malfunctioning machinery, himself. The robot son meets up with his old brother, and together, they try to take their father down. An angry conspiracy theorist creates a smear product against against a corporation. A horror video game. Didn't this corporation go under already? Wasn't there a copyright infringing haunted house a while back? It burned down, as the game depicts. Is there some truth to all this...? After witnessing the death of a child and the possession of a robot, someone gets obsessed with immortality, murders children, loses his own in the process. Except they're not really gone. A son rescues his sister, and more corpse than man, tries to take his father down, fails, and vows to try again. A man tries to free the ghosts his father left behind. Do they mistake the son for the father? Do they punish him? Does he rot away, doomed to stay in a rabbit-shaped prison? As it turns out, no. As it turns out, that was never meant to happen. As it turns out, the man worked as a night guard for a sleazy business. His coworker died. He got fired after a week and disappeared into the night. An undead serial killer haunting a robot survives an attempt on his life by his own undead son. He goes after that son, who is in a compromised position now, and reunites with his lost daughter, also haunting a robot. His first victim is here, but trapped, locked into a bear. Some of his old creations are here, broken apart and ugly. A buffet for him, it seems. It isn't. The trap is sprung, and his old business partner, perhaps a former friend, a relative of his first victim imprisoned all of them here. None of them shall leave. All of them shall burn. Angered, the ghost of someone killed too soon decides to lock their killer into an artificial purgatory. His first victim, an innocent bystander who did no wrong. Angered, the ghost of someone killed too soon decides to lock their killer into an artificial purgatory. His youngest child, ever nameless, ever ignored. Angered, the ghost of someone killed too soon decides to lock their killer into an artificial purgatory. His oldest child, callously led to his death like a lamb to the slaughter. After his gig working for a company, a developer gets a new opportunity, a VR game based on his older properties! Everything goes well, except for one incident. A young woman meets a strange anomaly of code. Her body is taken from her... After meeting a strange anomaly of code, a young woman develops a split personality intent on aiding the strange phenomenon. She kills children for him. Dresses up as a rabbit for him. Makes a body for him. He's a former serial killer, and he desires power. He influences nearby robots to try to get them to do his bidding, the way the young woman already does. He burns again. A robotic child meets a robot bear. The bear is his brother. They meet their sister. They don't get along. A robotic child meets his brother. They meet one of their sisters. There's dozens of her. One of them dresses up as a bunny and murders people. One acts as the CEO of a company and endangers lives. Therapists disappear. Children disappear. Robots disappear. A temporary setback, and the body will have to be built anew. It matters not, she has all the time in the world. A human looks up a murder case that happened in a restaurant. A king soon to crowned records himself screaming at a camera. William Afton has no name yet, but he will have a sprite, soon. Two men find one another. A crafty engineer and a cunning businessman. They open a restaurant, with a mechanical band. It isn't very good, but kids like it. The engineer has a child himself, young Micheal. He can't walk yet. A second is on the way. His coworker is married too, and they hope to have offspring soon, too. Everything is alright. A serial killer dupes an idiot into providing him ideal hunting grounds. A beaver is tossed aside. A man builds four robots. A different man builds four robots. The box is left empty.

The sad boi is forgotten from the FNAF lore

I think The Crying Child is such a underrated character I like him and I kinda like the theory that says he's the puppet Overall really great video my friend!

@notrealnamenotatall2476

Жыл бұрын

Thank you!

@davifariatertuliano

Жыл бұрын

@@notrealnamenotatall2476 You're welcome!

@sirfazbear4993

Жыл бұрын

You should see Discord, we talk about him all day

@davifariatertuliano

Жыл бұрын

@@sirfazbear4993 well I don't have discord

@sirfazbear4993

Жыл бұрын

@@davifariatertuliano I was exaggerating

3:47 The significance of The Bite of 87 was that it happened while animatronics were walking around, and the bite caused the company to not let the animatronics roam during the day, just wanna put that out there. edit: also doesn't make much sense for fredbear's to still exist by 1987, since in FNaF 2 they talk about it like it had closed decades ago.

@notrealnamenotatall2476

Жыл бұрын

I meant more in story relevance and cohesion. Having two identical bites in a timeline makes it unneededly messy. But to add on, the Toy animatronics DO exist in FNAF 4 because of the toys, so make from that what you will. XD

@andruspolanco6935

Жыл бұрын

@@notrealnamenotatall2476 you should've said: "This should HAVE BEEN the bite of 87" to avoid confusion like this guy thought you were saying that the bite of 83 is the bite of 87.

@notrealnamenotatall2476

Жыл бұрын

@@andruspolanco6935 Yeah, that might've been bad wording, admittedly.

@ic0nic707

Жыл бұрын

@@andruspolanco6935 I didn't think he meant that it *was.* I just meant the way the bite of 83 is presented, it doesn't really work for it to have been the bite of 87, y'know.

@Takejiro24

Жыл бұрын

Wait, did the Phone Guy actually use "decades" or is that hyperbole? I ask because I'm trying to figure out what the "Minor Retcon" was when Scott made FNAF 4.

6:45 I think Scott wanted to show that Puppet had the purpose to protect Henry's daughter with the green eyes and green bracelet and that the purple tears appeared supernaturally when she possessed the Puppet

I'm honestly of the opinion that the Bite of 87 was never meant to be important, just acting as a piece of worldbuilding.

@sirfazbear4993

Жыл бұрын

But 87 is still an accident

@notrealnamenotatall2476

Жыл бұрын

It probably wasn't... which makes it weirder that a completely different but virtually identical bite was created. XD

*" I d o n o t h a v e a p r o b l e m . "* Anyways. That suit in the backroom at the Diner definitely isn't the result of a springlock failure - those are rather... volatile, and no yellow fabric will have that much blood easily cleaned out of it. That said, I do wonder if that was intended to be a child or not - the browns are too bright by far to be intended to be the darkness and wires of the suit, I'd think. It's possible, even, that the head in their _was_ supposed to be Cassidy, if Cassidy was even a thing in Scott's mind by this point; or perhaps that there were always multiple souls in Goldie and the CC only ended up as the one in it later on, replacing some other unnamed character with even less lore than him. The differences between Fredbear and Golden Freddy also are notable here. It's possible that the suit we see there is Goldie, and not Fredbear at all - for one thing, shoving a corpse into an animatronic might keep it hidden but shoving one into a suit regularly worn by people is not going to do the same thing. Additionally, the springlocks probably wouldn't take well to a bleeding, uncontrolled body undergoing rigor mortis and potentially death throes alongside the blood and other bodily fluids, with it being all but dropped in there, much less physically forced in where it didn't fit. Sure, it'd be messy to clean up and probably render the suit unusable and body unidentifiable (other than by basic process of elimination or, I guess, DNA testing or something since this is fairly recent, in the early '80s and late '70s), but it would not stay hidden unless he also spent the next few days cleaning nonstop. So that suit with the head stuffed in it is either a spare, otherwise empty Fredbear suit (possible, given how many spare heads and whatnot lie around that there would be other suits), or it's a prototype full animatronic that then was left unused - Goldie. Anyways. FNaF 1 was intended to be a standalone. FNaF 3 was intended to be the finale. FNaF 4 was intended to be a bonus that didn't leave room for more games. FNaF: SL was intended to open everything up again, releasing more animatronics into the open and introduce various loose ends to be tied up again later. FNaF 6/FFPS was intended to be a finale, again. UCN was intended to be another bonus that didn't open loose ends, again. Then Scott sold the franchise. Essentially, the only games that didn't intend to cut the story off then and there were SL and _maybe_ FNaF 2. It's revealed by simple logistics that the Bites were two different events. I'm sure there were other bites, too. '87's bite resulted in the loss of the frontal lobe, which would require forward force and a fairly precise bite - Fredbear had neither. It could be argued that, sure, the CC was pushed in, but Fredbear lacks the jaw required to actually bite solely a small portion of the brain unless he basically takes off only that and also the entirety of the kid's face and front of his skull. His jaw and head are massive, rounded, and only bit that way due to the sheer force he apparently had in bite strength, which would've let him crush a rock if he wanted to, for whatever reason. SL's 'questionable design choices' were apparently not a unique phenomenon in these animatronics. Still, by the animation, it's rather clear that this bite is not just the frontal lobe. It's his whole head, and his whole brain by extension, other than perhaps the bits connecting directly to the spine. Remember that these animatronics have a second set of jaws inside on their endoskeleton, which would've gotten everything else - otherwise he wouldn't've bit like this and crushed the kid's head, but instead simply severed it rather cleanly. The only reason I'd think Fredbear's bite wasn't '87, is that it means the other pizzerias opened and closed in the space of, like, 2 years. And the first game showed the place had been opened for a while, although the second game's was fairly new (pretty sure it's just never shown if the Withereds were damaged by parts needed for repairs or just generally lost those). That 'brightening the teaser made the plush yellow' thing is ridiculous. People believed that because of how absurd so many claims were at the time - I was outside of the theorizing community, and I saw some of those. They were the most outlandish shit you'd ever hear. Anyways, the original Golden Freddy model is just a color-shifted Freddy image, so of course later on changing the color of an image - or slamming the saturation to the max - will make another Freddy look yellow. That's how that works, but it doesn't mean anything. Hell, you could do that to Toy Freddy and it would somewhat work, but it means nothing. Also damn it no, people shouldn't make Vanessa another Afton. That family is big enough. Anyways that last part - I remember _that_ theory. Supposedly the Marionette is male, but Charlie, who possesses it by then, is female. Then the Marionette as a whole is female, having been I guess subsumed by Charlie, but Lefty is male instead. And so forth. Nightmarionne is seemingly male, though it's kind of hard to tell beneath all that.

Oh man, I’m SO glad you switched to your real voice. These videos are really hard to go back to after your more recent output. Your progress is really astounding though, you’re doing great, keep at it.

Yeah, it's really confusing when adding lore upon lore with every new game ultimately retcons stuff

The only problem with CC being the puppet in the original story is the save him minigame in fnaf 2, where we see a crying child murdered outside what was presumably fredbears by william, followed by the puppet's jumpscare. Was this crying child the same as the fnaf 4 one ? If he is, how would that be possible ? Did he survive the bite and then get killed later by his own father ? Or is the child in the minigame a nameless victim of william and the puppet's subsequent is meant to represent the puppet's distaste and anger towards william's actions ? The notion you present is very compelling, and the parallels between cc and the puppet are spot on, but this minigame throws a major wrench into the idea

I have only recently fallen into fnaf fandom, and have been ravenously consuming lore theory content hours at a time. This is the first time I've seen anyone suggest that the crying child was supposed to be the puppet, and I am entirely convinced by everything that you say..... EXCEPT In the fnaf 2 mini game, when we see the child get murdered outside the diner, the jumpscare at the end is the puppet, implying this is the puppet origin story. In fact, the mini game tells us nothing of significance if this child is not the puppet. Yet obviously the crying child died in the bite, not murdered by William after getting locked outside. How do you reconcile the two things?

@notrealnamenotatall2476

Жыл бұрын

Honestly, it's kind of messy. Like when Fnaf 4 came out, the common theory was that the Crying Child didn't die by the bite and there was supposed evidence to support it. This got a resurgence for the Orange Guy minigame where the bald person, possibly child, was assumed to be the Crying Child. Yet another theory that died out. There was just so much leaning towards the Crying Child being the Puppet that it was easy to work with it. It was a minigame that was already somewhat vague, was sort of looked over until Pizzeria Simulator redid the minigame... in a way that's inaccurate to the initial minigame, showing that it went through some sort of expanded rewrite. In hindsight, it is very possible that the Crying Child's backstory was actually rewritten twice. It's obvious now that the Fnaf storyline has had major changes to it over the years and retcons... but it's unclear what part of what is a retcon. All I know is that the telegraphing is there. So, either this was the intention at some time, or the Crying Child's entire creation was a massive red herring for no discernable reason.

@notrealnamenotatall2476

Жыл бұрын

Also, thank you! 83 I'm glad you like my videos!

@zerezartz

Жыл бұрын

im actually impresed by the fact someone could enter the fandom and understand the ridiculous overcomplicated lore at this point

@forbiddenmemez4786

Жыл бұрын

@@notrealnamenotatall2476 The crying child did die from the bite this made directly clear in the game, where we hear the flatline sound effect of his heart monitor flatlining at the end of the night 6. This is why i dont think he can be the puppet.. and was probably never meant to be the puppet, unless scott somehow forgot the details of his own story.

There is one reason it's not the bite of 87. After the bite of 87 the animatronics were prohibited from walking freely. The springlocks can't do it anyway, so it would make no sense. WHICH IS INFURIATING, BECAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT, IT SHOULD'VE BEEN THE BITE OF 87!

Great video, i really like how you explain BV being one of the most forgettable, and the most confusing Character, although I did disagree on some of the other parts of the video, but notherless this video was great, which we all wanted for FNAF 4 to be the bite of 87, but apparently it's not.

Imo Midnight Motorist is a parent coming home to find the child missing, taken by William Afton. A child in that home would definitely be susceptible to kidnapping, especially if "that place he ran off to again" was Freddy's. This explains the animal footprints (Afton in a costume). The lump in the woods could also be Susie's dog. My main problem is with the rain but it's possible Afton used a regular costume instead of the Springlock suits. Idk but it matches with the other minigames relating to one of Afton's victims.

@PhoenixRoseYT

Жыл бұрын

I actually like this theory more than the one that says Midnight Motorist is about the Aftons.

I always thought that the "1983" on the TV was meant to finally establish some kind of time frame... Like a VHS that is copyrighted 1983. It plays on repeat on the TV. But I think Cawthon has always - even though he will never admit this - edited his story to fit the fan theories. Because FNAF was intended to be the last game he ever made and he did not plan on its success, he has been flying by the seat of his pants ever since. The storyline of these games is fluid depending on how Cawthon wants to frighten players. There are events that provide drama and speculation, and in the end it doesn't matter very much where these threads go. So they get dropped, picked up again, warped, changed, melted, distorted until it's a bunch of puzzle pieces that KINDA fit together in a million different ways. Which is frustrating, because then they put in a bunch of clues and puzzles to solve that aren't ultimately leading to anything. Your reward for solving the puzzle is never a completed puzzle, it's just another piece.

I'm delighted to see that lately I've been finding videos of people talking about how they feel like CC might have had been The Puppet at one point in the story, because this was my exact sentiment for YEARS. I actually liked it better that way tbh. I elaborated on this more on "NotMyRealName NotAtAll"s video, which is a very similar video to this one.

@sprungle

Жыл бұрын

why did i not realize this was the same channel 💀💀

It's so funny that I have been a part of this fandom since 2015 but I still don't know the whole lore

@notrealnamenotatall2476

Жыл бұрын

It's pretty hefty. XD

@thecriticalghost4626

Жыл бұрын

I think no one really knows

4:00 Personally I disagree, I don’t think The Bite of 87 really mattered, when Phone Guy mentioned it, he quickly made it a passing mention, also said “It’s amazing that the human body can live without a frontal lobe, you know?”. Evan didn’t survive this bite though. Also for those who would say Phone Guy is lying, I say, the Bite of 83 should be known because there would’ve been withnesses so the staff can’t lie.

I have an interesting theory what if fredbear was built to have a powerful jaw after all cracking a human skull can a hard nut to crack depending on age and who would build a robot with a jaw like that unless you're william Afton

@lxi..

Жыл бұрын

that's pretty interesting tbh. My theory was that the crying child was crying so much while in Fredbears' mouth that his tears water damaged the endo skeleton inside, causing it to snap shut as it powered down

I call him Evan just because I like the name, it sounds soft and it's a Christian name to, but OHGOD he is my fav character, one that got his own game, and yet... they didn't give him a name.... well, they probably did, "Norman" and then apparently throw it out? Ah, it's really frustrating, but I love CC anyway 🙏😭

Granted its just speculation, but, unless elsewhere the crying child bite is directly stated to be in 83 and not 87, the copyright of 1883 on the screen could be a rerun or VHS tape.

You said that Scott probably wanted to make the crying child the puppet but the puppet died by Afton outside of a pizzeria while the crying child died because of the bite

@notrealnamenotatall2476

Жыл бұрын

Well, actually we don't get a confirmation that the child died from the bite. Nor that he is currently alive or dead... Which, yes, is an issue. XD This poor unnamed, unknown child.

@ic0nic707

Жыл бұрын

@@notrealnamenotatall2476 I mean, we hear him flatline at the end of the game.

@andruspolanco6935

Жыл бұрын

@@notrealnamenotatall2476 Confirmed with the flatline while the crying child fades away

Here is what I don't like about the Bite of '83 and the Bite of '87: They were two completely different random bites caused by animatronics. Why wasn't Fazbear Entertainment investigating the mouths of these animatronics as they were being build to make sure they wouldn't bite children, crush their skulls, and cause traumatic brain injuries. Seriously, how weren't they sued? How does that plot line not exist until Pizzeria Simulator? The only evidence of legal action was the fact that in FNAF 1, a poster says that the place will shutdown by year's end, but that's not a lawsuit, it's most likely the Utah Department of Health putting their put down on the restaurant over the animatronics with bodily fluids oozing out of them!

6:46 to show that the Puppet itself changed after being possessed

@notrealnamenotatall2476

Жыл бұрын

It grew stripes. XD

@thesmilingman7576

Жыл бұрын

@@notrealnamenotatall2476 I thought you meant the face

The 87 thing pisses me off. The story can be pieced together relatively cohesively (in my mind at least) with it being the Bite of 87. Having changed it, it makes no sense that there are toys that specifically reference the Fnaf 2 animatronics meaning, at the very least, the Missing Children's Incident must have happened. And like you said, it brings no conclusion to a major plot point in the series that was hinted at from day 1. In fact, in Fnaf 1 if you put 1-9-8-7 in the custom night, you would get the Golden Freddy jumpscare. This was added later, I think as a fan's suggestion, but it wouldn't have been hard for Scott to include it when he was expanding the lore for the series.

Evan is a way more fitting main then Mike will ever be.

12:03 I just want to say, during the crying child's death, the golden plush bear lines are not the same color as the dialog spoken by the plush in the rest of fnaf 4. While William may have been speaking to him through the plush, the final cut scene of night 6 is not William speaking. strangely enough, its the same color as another child earlier in the game. So it is likely only the night 6 cut scene where the puppet could supposedly talk to him.

ya know what...i think you're right that he was the puppet, scott has basically stated he retconned the save him minigame to save her at this point, but why change only a characters gender for like, nothing?

What if,he survived the bite and he was the one continuing fazbear entertainment,being that he discovered his father's work when he wake up from the coma,and got invested to continue the company that gave his father money to make all that shit

@ic0nic707

Жыл бұрын

We saw him flatline.

@Theonefromcrk

Жыл бұрын

@@ic0nic707 what I said is a theory that not even I believe

@Theonefromcrk

Жыл бұрын

@@ic0nic707 just like throwing it in the wind

@ic0nic707

Жыл бұрын

@@Theonefromcrk fair enough

@sirfazbear4993

Жыл бұрын

@@Theonefromcrk That's why theorist fail to read, that's why I always say (imo) or that this is something I theorized about/ speculate

I believe the orange man’s child broke the window and climbed out to go to freddy’s

@notrealnamenotatall2476

Жыл бұрын

That is very possible, but why not just open the window or go out the front door?

@risepticeye

Жыл бұрын

@@notrealnamenotatall2476 also i do still believe that William afton did get involved as you can see a non human set of footprints

Lol I love your passion this video was not the same without your voice

Funnily enough it looks like the movie might be playing into that mikes younger brother being the puppet if we go off that theory

This is a spicy take, I like it

I am so late, but I just want to put out, is it possible that the crying chid saw the springlock incidents and that is why plush golden Freddy keeps reminding him about what he saw and that he needs to stay away from the animotronics and thats why he gets scared when he see someone being put in the suit, because he knows what the suit can do to someone

This is why i've been steadily been moving towards CC being mike, it makes more sense and is super satisfying for me

I agree that the bite of 83, was originally going to be the bite of 87. People seems to complicate simple stuff for the sake of over analyzing.

I agree with everything, also wth bite of 83 beinf the bute of 87...it would have made the figurines of the toy animatronics make sense

Interesting.

@notrealnamenotatall2476

Жыл бұрын

Thanks. That means a lot coming from you, Dave.

@Dave_Miller_TP

Жыл бұрын

@@notrealnamenotatall2476 no problem, Sportsy. I love how in DSAF he’s just phoney’s “kid” and nothing more

@marcsuraci7759

Жыл бұрын

@@Dave_Miller_TP isn’t he called Mike Jr. all Phone Guy’s are named Scott so who’s Mike Sr.? Lol

@Dave_Miller_TP

Жыл бұрын

@@marcsuraci7759 there’s no Mike sr. Mikey is the older brother in dsaf

Didn't MatPat say the reason Scott didn't release what was in the box because the plot changed when we theorized exactly what he was hinting at plot wise so he thought we would think it was lack Luster and just kind of gave up? I think even if it was waaay after the fact and it was lack luster Scott should have released the box info just to confirm some loose ends for fans that patiently waited and boosted the algorithm around his game on KZread all that time

@ViktorErikFade

Жыл бұрын

Also wouldn't it have been crazy if there was just a momento of the crying child and the puppet shoved into the box ? Would have been morbid but no less morbid than shoving people in spring lock suits

What’s the line Charlie says in Twisted Ones that’s the same as the gold plushie?

A few notes: 1. Fnaf 1 cam out on August 8th 2. Minigame sprites are always inconsistent 3. Fredbears wasn't around in 1987

@notrealnamenotatall2476

Жыл бұрын

Actually, the books confirm that Fredbear's Family Diner was the original and was where Charlie/Sammy was kidnapped from. The Pizzeria in Fnaf 4 matches the description of the diner... but it is unclear what is what and where is when.

@FunnyMichael69dyourmum

Жыл бұрын

@@notrealnamenotatall2476 Ok. Don't care. Fredbear's was closed by 1987 is what I'm saying

@notrealnamenotatall2476

Жыл бұрын

Ok. Don't care. ;)

@Hoogalindo

Жыл бұрын

​@@FunnyMichael69dyourmumChild.

I always thought CC was intended to be Funtime Freddy.

@sirfazbear4993

Жыл бұрын

But ho-

@commanderAnakin

Жыл бұрын

@@sirfazbear4993 There's a bunch of stuff which seems intentional. Funtime Freddy has a companion, which tells him to go to sleep. (Similar to Psychic Friend Fredbear) Funtime Freddy acts like he has brain damage. It seems the Funtimes contain the souls of the Aftons (except Michael, who I believe is supposed to be Funtime Foxy and that is why it's voiceless in SL) Funtime Freddy is also obsessed with birthdays. Molten Freddy brings us more evidence, why would the Funtimes choose Funtime Freddy as their leader? Molten Freddy's voice lines are also interesting, as he says: "One big happy family!" "Together again!"

@lesles910

Жыл бұрын

@@commanderAnakin oh damn

@thecriticalghost4626

Жыл бұрын

@@commanderAnakin that's actually neat

@Shadowmouse1277

2 ай бұрын

@commanderAnakin they were built to represent the afton family funtime freddy only acts like the crying child because of his programing

first off - the "things" in fredbear suit you mentioned to be someone's hair is actually just wires. admit it. second off - gameplay is definitely seen by Michael during FNAF1 events, which explains the gameplay similarities and phone call on the first night. He COULD be the crying child, but that's still a debatable theme which i don't want to cover here. about the importance of a character: i don't think he became less important. Again - depending on which Mike theory you believe, he still can be the main character of the series(MikeVictim), and he can be turned into a less important sidecharacter(MikeBully). about the bites: i think there is only 1 bite. bite of 83 happens as we know - older brother puts younger in fredbear's mouth on 31th october, and he (depending on what mike theory you believe) maybe dies. the bite of 87 was never ever mentioned after fnaf 1 and fnaf 4 teasers, its just gone. we get hints to bite of 83 in fnaf help wanted, security breach(unsure),fnaf sl. but bite of 87 is practically gone. why? because it doesn't exist anymore. scott retconed bite of 87 to turn into bite of 83, leaving the reason why fnaf2 location closed unclear. it could be the DCI(dead children incident) we see in the minigames, which could have been made by some malfunctioning animatronics(possibly toy animatronics, counting how afton likes bunnies he could've messed up toy bonnie to do that, just a small thought). as we know the restaurant in fnaf2 was closed at like 6th due to police investigations as phoneguy mentions, which later uncovered the DCI and closed the fnaf 2 location completely. boom, solved. we did it boys - bite of 87 no more.

@bigbadgammagnome

Жыл бұрын

Wires? In the suit where employees are supposed to stick their head? Why would *wires* be there, there's nothing electrical there, just mechanical. These animatronics aren't battery powered ffs

@xharerae

Жыл бұрын

​@@bigbadgammagnome We can see some wires inside springtrap, and counting that he's supposed to be without endo inside(judging by fact that Afton was able to get inside of it in the first place) we can definitely say that springlock suits DO HAVE some wiring. If he infact doesn't have wiring, then it could be explained in 2 ways: either some springlock parts sticking out, or it could be that Fredbear has an endoskeleton inside during that minigame, which explains how its able to maintain "classic fredbear sit pose" without falling apart, which a barren springlock suit would most likely do.

@xharerae

Жыл бұрын

@@bigbadgammagnome The Bite of 87 was definitely retconed into Bite of 83, so this is rather a hint towards Bite of 83, since most likely the frontal lobe being bitten off remains the same.

Were did you get that a.i voice?

@notrealnamenotatall2476

Жыл бұрын

Naturalreaders.com. ^_^

@theremymonsters

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for answering so fast and responding most people don't respond to other people I will subscribe

When FNAF 4 came out he said that all the theories was wrong that no one got it right. Meaning The bite can be 87 but everyone was saying it was 83....and if it was 87, and the person lived, why on fnaf 4 made it seem that be dead. They the golden Freddie plush said he is broken.... so Do u remember in security breach when one of the voice line glamrock Freddie tell Gregory that he is broken...🤔 But the original like was that he was bleeding and that Gregory cut him arm crawling through the vents. Both games Freddie said to a kid (they both even look similar) that line. But what happened he was just telling him that he was hurt or alone. Maybe even scare or smth like that. I agree Scott would change the narrative of the story based off things that happen or he will remove content that can explain things. You all remember when Mark was playing and he yelled at golden Freddie even though there was no such thing as golden Freddy it was just the lighting and then it became a thing. Some with phone guy , purple guy.... we all thought before FNAF the puppet was the crying child and the Game theories channel made avid about it ans as far back then he got thr theory right. But now it's Henry daughter??? That's crazy. Now we suppose to solve some of the lore by the books? Even Mike. Or the one u should of never killed .. Even also Andrew in the books? Is canon in game that he's inside golden. (I forgot thr name of the kid is Evan in the survival log book) and Cassidy Huhh I think they forgot or confused themselves PLUS THE REUSED NAMES

I think the retcon to 1983 was to make Mike older. Just make it cannon phone guy forgot the date. Lol.

The problem with that being the '87, which at some point before or after FNaF 4's it was supposed to be, is that it would have not made sense in the story. The bite of '87 caused the animatronics to stop roaming in the day, while in FNaF 4 the animatronics don't move, employees use the suits. If we were to talk about FNAF 4 disregarding dream theory, this would make a plothole in the story.

I personally think that the crying child was going to shadow Freddy

There is actually a reason thats the bate of 83 doesn't match 87, and that's the animatronics didn't have free roaming mode yet. It's the reason they aren't allowed to move during the day in FNAF1, and they had free roaming mode in FNAF2.

If the crying child is the puppet, then why would he die in Fread Bear’s mouth and outside of the diner? A kid can only die once, and 1-4 didn’t have the “robot kid” excuse.

@notrealnamenotatall2476

Жыл бұрын

Why did the numbers change from 87 to 83 before release? I think the 'death' was added in around the same time those numbers changed. The retcon happened before release, remember.

@sweetlifealley

Жыл бұрын

@@notrealnamenotatall2476 I can understand how you could have 2 bites with different victims. How can you have 2 deaths of the same victim? If the answer is “just ignore the save him mini game” well that’s not satisfying because Scott said everything from 1-4 had a purpose. So now we have to reconcile 2 deaths of the same person without throwing out one of the mini games

@sweetlifealley

Жыл бұрын

@@notrealnamenotatall2476 there’s also another problem. The crying child died on his birthday. The Fred bear plushy promised to put the crying child back together. The puppet gave a kid a party, which revealed the birthday boy to be golden Freddy, and this freed his spirit. You can argue that the puppet put the crying child back together. This would make the puppet a separate kid.

@sweetlifealley

Жыл бұрын

@@notrealnamenotatall2476 oh! Here’s another thing. Although I’m not sure what to make of it. What if that kid stuffed in the Fred bear suit back stage, what if he is the kid killed in the “save him” mini game? Purple guy kills a kid outside, drags him in, and stuffs him in Fred bear. He possessed the Fred bear plush, promised to put the crying child back together, possesses the puppet, and puts golden Freddy (the crying child) back together on his happiest day. I know it’s weird but this explains the kid that died before the crying child.

Yup... not even a minute in and my ears are bleeding. Thankfully, your newer vids don't appear to use that voice filter/text to speech.

4:45 Fredbears would have been closed by 1987 as phone guy says in FNaF 2

@notrealnamenotatall2476

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, but it didn't clarify how long it had been closed. Especially since the Toy animatronics did exist at the time of Fnaf 4, as shown by the toys. It's... messy.

@thesmilingman7576

Жыл бұрын

@@notrealnamenotatall2476 off model merchandise

@gdeveloper3309

Жыл бұрын

i think the fnaf 2 phone call said that fredbear's closed years ago and that they doubt they'd find the original owner

I think the biggest hole in this theory is the fact that if Crying Child is the Puppet, then who is the Kid that died at the end of that Fnaf 2 Mini-game where the Puppet Jumpscares you?

@notrealnamenotatall2476

Жыл бұрын

Honestly, that depends on if the Crying Child died or not, which was unconfirmed at the time… and actually is still kind of unconfirmed now.

@soupywolf5234

Жыл бұрын

iirc the final (Non-locked box) cutscene ends with the sound of a flatlining heart monitor as the Fredbear plush fades away and leaves the Crying Child alone. So I’m pretty sure the Crying Child _does_ die after the events of FNaF 4

@Le_Phantom

Жыл бұрын

There are somethings there too, where the puppet's bracelets a thing by fnaf 2? In the minigame the puppet animatronic isn't there; the corpses/souls are supposed to get inside animatronics; the "save him" too, isn't the puppet then *one* that saves those victims? Was there a soul already on golden/fredbear on fnaf 4? (If it's a head on the suit) puppet just needs to be before the main four, we see other faceless kids die on minigames without making it into a suit too.... Now I wonder, can the story from 1 to 4 be solved with just those games while forgetting everything else?

@PhoenixRoseYT

Жыл бұрын

There are two crying children: the Afton child, and Charlotte Emily. The latter possesses the puppet after being killed by Bill Afton.

Lore of A Crying Child and a Forgotten Plot (Fnaf's Missing Character) momentum 100