Jump to content
Spin Attaxx

Five Nights at Freddy's - Help Wanted in Virtual Reality

Recommended Posts

 So...Plushtrap was a completely pointless piece of misdirection that...speeds up time? I guess?

And I'm trying to reconcile that whoever this kids' parent(s) are they both care enough to bother to rent out a place for a birthday but care little enough to not make sure he isn't utterly terrified of the place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's normal for siblings to 'torture' one another, but the brother really was quite the bully to this kid who was terrified of animatronics anyway (a fair common fear).

The purple man's presence and knowledge still leads me to believe he was the Phone Guy since he did have the security access to the suits. Was he the father? I don't know. Was he just destroyed by grief? Did he vow vengeance on bullying children? Was it bullies who were targeted and killed?

The kid is not dead though. The grey text speaking in the ending of the 6th night is most certainly his brother who caused the bite in the first place. These nightmares take place while the kid is comatose and is constantly reliving his fears.

Man, I can't wait for the DLC Scott promised.

By the way, there are some sound issues that Scott has been made aware of such as the breathing not being loud enough which should be fixed so you don't have to turn your sound all the way up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I'm wondering is:

 

Why is the kid so scared of the animatronics in the first place, but owns plush toys of them all? I actually think that the kid was a huge fan of Freddy & Co, but after a nightmare, he became afraid of them and his conscience manifested as a talking Fredbear doll, saying things such as "he hates you" in regards to Fredbear himself. Of course, the stories about the animatronics moving around at night and having bodies stuffed into them probably didn't help. 

As as for the ending, I think that the brother and his friends are murdered by Purple Guy (the father) as revenge for the bite, however their souls possess the animatronics. I think this because each of the four are wearing a respective mask, each one correlating to a certain animatronic. By this logic, Foxy is the kid's brother. This might also explain why Foxy has always been so 'special' in comparison to the other animatronics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I'm wondering is:

 

 

Hidden Content

The thing is, you can have a fear of animatronics but love the characters themselves. It's a phobia, but plush toys are often irresistible and you can be a fan of the characters, seeing the animatronics as 'false images' but find comfort in the characters themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hidden Content

By the way, there are some sound issues that Scott has been made aware of such as the breathing not being loud enough which should be fixed so you don't have to turn your sound all the way up.

Actually it is possible the child did die since there has been proof that wasn't the Bite of 87. I came up with a theory that the child when he heard his brother talking to him was the last moments of his life before he went on to possess the puppet. Also I think the plushie actually was haunted, by Purple Guy's first victim since we know the Marionette died not by the hands of Purple Guy but of the children's hands. This means the child who was murdered in the FNAF 2 minigame was actually the child who goes onto possess Golden Freddy now revealed to be Fredbear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hidden Content

I meant the child, not the animatronic itself. Also what I meant about how purple guy was originally thought to be the marionette's murderer based on FNAF2. Remember the Give them Cake minigame? Also I am not talking like this is 100% confirmed. -_- I'm just merely discussing theories based on what was in FNAF4. Also we know the child is the marionette because of the Night 6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, there are some sound issues that Scott has been made aware of such as the breathing not being loud enough which should be fixed so you don't have to turn your sound all the way up.

Wait, you mean that wasn't intentional? Part of me figured it was just to force people to endure the jumpscares at full volume if they fucked up, though in hindsight I did kinda wonder what Markiplier was actually hearing in his video because I never heard it myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been keeping up with FNAF4 material, and I have a few ideas that might shed light on a few things.  Apologies, I'm not that well-informed on the lore of the first two games, but I think I've covered a lot of the FNAF4 footage that's out there now, so heavy spoilers here.

Firstly, while the events of the game look a lot like the infamous bite of '87 - birthday party, bite - that event's very connections to FNAF2 prove that this cannot be it, unless there have been significant retcons.  As such, I'd like to suggest that the Bite of '87 was actually a case of "history repeating itself," as you often get when dealing with curses and hauntings.  Indeed, aren't all four games a case of history repeating itself over and over in slightly different forms?

The setting is pretty clearly Fredbear's Family Diner.  The Fredbear character, or rather Golden Freddy, is front and centre as a picture and animatronic.  The parts room we see in one of the minigames clearly contains parts only for the golden animatronics, Fredbear and Spring Bonnie.  This tallies with what was already theorised about Fredbear's, that its sole animatronics were the two golden, spring animatronics.  Now, while there is merchandise all over the place of the other Freddy's characters, do we actually see animatronics for them?  No.  So it is reasonable to suggest that the non-golden animatronics were originally other characters in the expanded Fredbear's fiction which were not made into animatronics until it became necessary to distance the franchise from the original, golden, spring animatronics.

This sheds some, but not much, light on the pink room in the protagonist's house.  Mangle, in pieces, appears to be present in that room - but note that it's considerably smaller than the other animatronics, and notably the Foxy mask worn by the protagonist's brother.  As such, I would like to suggest that this Mangle is in fact a toy Mangle, an action figure or doll - and thus the contradiction disappears.  The pink room is more interesting than that, though.  Mangle's presence, the pink bed, the large pink flower picture are all clear shorthand for it being a girl's room, but the protagonist and his sibling are both stated to be male during the game.  Could there have been a third, female sibling who we never see, who the brother also bullied by destroying her Mangle doll?

The purple guy appears briefly in an Easter Egg.  He is seen inside Fredbear's, putting the Spring Bonnie head upon a performer in the Spring Bonnie costume.  The purple guy also has a gold line on his chest.  I propose that this is a nametag, and that purple guy is an employee of Fredbear's, likely some kind of supervisor.  Being a franchise employee accounts for the ease with which he committed and concealed his later crimes (FNAF3 showed that he had a whole secret room in the Pizzeria, for instance, and there's no way a non-employee could hide that).

A final note about the brother.  In the first minigame to take place at Fredbear's, the brother has left the protagonist on his own, and the protagonist is then confronted and chased by a person in a Fredbear costume.  This performer is referred to in the same way as the brother, as a presence fearsome to the protagonist.  Now, I don't think this is the only explanation here, but we also see that the brother locks the protagonist in the diner's animatronics parts room at one point, and the final minigame indicates that he has the free run of the place.  Could the brother work at Fredbear's as a Fredbear performer?  Note that this is a job which it would not be surprising to see an unskilled teenager employed in; that's the cliché for diner employees, and it would require no skill to stand around in a costume waving.  This might also tie in with the idea that the purple guy, a Freddy's employee, is in fact the father of the characters in question, although I'm not sure there's anything else to point to that as yet.

The main reason I suggest that, though... well, the possibility of the brother wearing a Fredbear costume got me thinking.  It's interesting that the game is called "Five Nights at Freddy's" when the nights are not, in fact, spent at Freddy's.  But that contradiction would disappear if either the protagonist or his brother was named...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been keeping up with FNAF4 material, and I have a few ideas that might shed light on a few things.  Apologies, I'm not that well-informed on the lore of the first two games, but I think I've covered a lot of the FNAF4 footage that's out there now, so heavy spoilers here.

Hidden Content

Ah that was similar to my lines of thought too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hidden Content

The brother taking home bits of Mangle isn't a huge hole. The guy's a jerk who bullys his brother, breaks things and takes "souveniers" home. That's it. Also, it's not established that the kid has a sister, so it being a girl's room soley because it's pink is some pretty shakey evidence. Also, you say that "years =/= a huge number". I point out that if this is the Bite of 87 (which it must be, after all the buildup we've gotten and the lack of mention of any other bite happening), then "years ABSOLUTELY CANNOT = mere hours". Note the context of Phone Guy's line - he's saying it's been so long since the place closed down that a police investigation will have a hard time tracking anyone down. Add to Mangle's parts existing in some form at all, and it's clear this is set in 1987 (given the character only lasts about two weeks before being scrapped).

As for why Fredbear was brought out, who can say - like I said, there could be numerous reasons (Fredbear is a "special occasion character" (this one seems likely, given how he has a plush existing alongside a Freddy plush), necessity due to lack of proper animatronics, Fazbear Entertainment being Fazbear Entertainment etc.)  but it would appear that after Fredbear's closed and became Freddy's, the Fredbear character was at least partially integrated into the main cast. Or maybe they figured they could get away with using them so long as they stayed in animatronic mode. The room the kid is locked in in one of the minigames would seem to be the Safe Room where the suits are stored.

Or hell, maybe this is some backwater area where a Fredbear's is still running, who knows. Hopefully the Halloween update will make things clearer.

Also, RE the Purple Man:

On closer inspection the brother and his friends look more like teenagers than children (they're all taller than the kid, for one) and if this does take place in between FNAF 2's nights, then he'll have already killed the kids. So I don't think this is the reason why he killed to begin with, and even if it was, you'd think he'd go after teens and not kids. It also seems unlikely that he's the child's dad, given how he's demoted to a cameo appearance helping someone into a suit (framing someone in the process?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hidden Content

Also, RE the Purple Man:

Hidden Content

*sigh* I'm not even going to argue anymore. I've given my points, I stated multiple times on why it can't be 1987 yet you keep ignoring me and insisting I'm wrong. I remain firm with my stance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So something else came up: there is indeed a Seventh "Nightmare" Night. Skip to 7:17 to see what happens after beating it, but beware - there's a spoiler thumbnail for a certain animatronic:

Hidden Content

Right the DLC that might come out on Halloween. It will probably answer the last remaining questions.

Oh and while I know I said I was going to stop, this one is going to be my last counter argument for why the Night 5 ending is not the Bite of 87.I have proof that the game isn't in 1987 but rather 1983!

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=487130653

And that's Game, Set, Match for the Bite of 87. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I just saw a video of that and was coming to report it.  That does seem to rather clear things up.

It is a bit of a shame, as the storyline absolutely has "Bite of '87" written all over it.  Possibly it was conceived of as that, but the direction Scott wanted to take the plot in contradicted the timeline of FNAF2, and so it had to be pushed earlier?  At the very least it accounts for why Fredbear's was closed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We're forgetting the fact that there is merchandise of the toy animatronics, as well as be fact that Mangle parts exist in the boy's house. Remember: the toys are the most advanced animatronics in the series, and were fresh off the lot in 1987. We must also remember the fact that the toy animatronics were in service long after the springlock suits were decommissioned and never heard from again. The TV show is not a smoking gun for the year this game takes place, because shows can be aired long after their initial trademark dates displayed on the title screen. If CN airs an episode of "Scooby Doo, Where Are You?" today, it doesn't mean we time travel to the 60s.

To me, the fact that the toy, springlock, and withered animatronics are all existing at the same time in popular consciousness is just a huge fucking anomaly that is only easily reconciled by throwing out the assumptions we made about hard borders between events and establishments. The TV show indicates the franchise is probably bigger than we imagine, so it's possible that there was more than one Fredbears, so to speak. It is less a local attraction and more like a Chuck E. Cheese, meaning there are probably large swathes of toy, springlock, and the "withered" suits around, not all of which are haunted. Indeed, that there's no proof that the withered animatronics in the gameplay are haunted so much as it is the boy is simply freaking out and having hallucinations of them lends credence to the idea that they are not the same individuals in 1 and 2.

All in all, the events that happened in the establishment in 2 may not have been reflective of everything that was happening elsewhere in the universe. It's still possible this is in 87, but simply not in 2's establishment, and for all we know the party that Jeremy was staffed on ended just fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which they did by getting a new place and staffing it with new animatronics- the toys. That isn't a refutation of reigning theory that the toys and springlocks were never in service at the same time. Mangle is the kicker- She still doesn't have a functioning body, which was an off-the-cuff attraction that the lazy staff in 2 thought of at that establishment, the establishment that did not exist before 1987 as per all of the "grand reopening" PR. Otherwise, we have to assume that Mangle (a name that was also made up in 1987) was meant to simply be ripped apart from the outset, but if we do then it makes no sense that staff were even trying to always put her back together in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does seem to be the establishment from 2, however, if the Purple Man's cameo is any indication (unless the murders happened elsewhere, but then why would the animatronics - haunted or not - go after Jeremy?).

And again, Phone Guy doesn't mention any incident, only that the old Freddy's was "kinda left to rot for quite a while". It could be that the "incident" was nothing more than parents seeing the place as old and grody, and not because of anything sinister.

(also I really hate it when people assume that the FNaF2 Freddy's directly succeded Fredbear's, when a lot of evidence (3's tapes, Phone Guy's familiarity with Freddy's and the characters but not Fredbear's etc.) explains that there was an original Freddy's in between the two)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hidden Content

I know the phone guy never said there was incident at Fazbear's. but he did say previous location. When you look at Fredbear's place in FNAF4, notice how it looks nothing like a family diner. That is because O believe the pizzaria tried to make Fredbear the star but after the incident they quickly locked him and Springtrap away. In an attempt to get new business, they change the name to Freddy Fazbear's Pizzaria, making Freddy the new star.

Oh I'm having to type on my phone and it doesn't seem to have a spoiler button so I'm trying to tread around them carefully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the phone guy never said there was incident at Fazbear's. but he did say previous location. When you look at Fredbear's place in FNAF4, notice how it looks nothing like a family diner. That is because O believe the pizzaria tried to make Fredbear the star but after the incident they quickly locked him and Springtrap away. In an attempt to get new business, they change the name to Freddy Fazbear's Pizzaria, making Freddy the new star.

Oh I'm having to type on my phone and it doesn't seem to have a spoiler button so I'm trying to tread around them carefully.

We know little about Fredbear's other than that it was the precursor to Freddy's and Fredbear was the star - "Fredbear's Family Diner" is just a name, after all. I could open a restaurant named "Robby's Cool Castle" but have it be built anywhere but a castle. And of course, what we saw couldn't have been Fredbear's if we saw the Bite of 87 (which we, in all likelihood, did). The new management probably liked Freddy more than Fredbear (since the cartoon implies that the two were separate characters and not one undergoing a name change) and decided to make him the star instead. I'm not a Chuck E Cheese's or Showbiz Pizza or whatever historian, but I wouldn't be surprised if such a thing really happened to such a place in real life. If by "incident" you mean the incident that resulted in the springlock suits being decommissioned, then it couldn't have happened at Fredbear's - Phone Guy explicitly calls the place "Freddy Fazbear's Pizza" in the tape where he mentions it. I don't think they'd be trying to make Fredbear the star if they gave top billing to Freddy instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay so I did research and a family diner is exactly that, a family diner.

So we know at some point when it got bought and turned into a pizzaria, Fredbear was advertised as the star despite the name being Freddy Fazbear's Pizzaria.

Gah Scott keep making things confusing!

Also since you think it is the event, can you care to explain how you know who became you know as indicated by Night 6 ending?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay so I did research and a family diner is exactly that, a family diner.

So we know at some point when it got bought and turned into a pizzaria, Fredbear was advertised as the star despite the name being Freddy Fazbear's Pizzaria.

Gah Scott keep making things confusing!

Like I said, a name is just a name. Regardless of whether it's a diner or a pizzaria, it's a place where families eat food and that's what matters. Would you care this much if the place had been named "Yalgoth's Spicy Spaceship" despite not being an actual spaceship? Or if it was named "King Mammoth's Chicken Castle" despite not being an actual castle? Or if it was named "Ben Boffin's Bar" despite serving more than just drinks? I can go on and on.

The Fredbear stuff pictured everywhere may or may not be a case of Unreliable Narrator. Or as Nepenthe said some sort of anomoly that fucks with everything.

Also since you think it is the event, can you care to explain how you know who became you know as indicated by Night 6 ending?

I... don't get what you're trying to say here?

Are you implying that I'm suggesting that the kid ended up possessing Golden Freddy/Fredbear or what? Because I'm not. And even I have no clue as to what the Night 6 ending means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said, a name is just a name. Regardless of whether it's a diner or a pizzaria, it's a place where families eat food and that's what matters. Would you care this much if the place had been named "Yalgoth's Spicy Spaceship" despite not being an actual spaceship? Or if it was named "King Mammoth's Chicken Castle" despite not being an actual castle? Or if it was named "Ben Boffin's Bar" despite serving more than just drinks? I can go on and on.

The Fredbear stuff pictured everywhere may or may not be a case of Unreliable Narrator. Or as Nepenthe said some sort of anomoly that fucks with everything.

I... don't get what you're trying to say here?

Hidden Content

Aha! Figured out how I can use the spoiler button on my phone.

I mean if that really was the bite of 87 (I still think it isn't but I'm through arguing about that) anyway. How did the kid become the puppet if the bite didn't kill him? It pretty much hints the kid goes on to possess the puppet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.