5 nights at freddys

[sailing101]

One thing I pointed out in the comments of that video was this:

Matpat's example of how frontal lobotomy was used to prevent frequent nightmares was slightly flawed. The content of the dreams was unchanged, the dreamer just couldn't feel fear anymore.

[Kith]

Indeed...

 

Though if the player is supposed to react in a similar fashion to the protagonist (as is typical for games), and is feeling fear, it's reasonable to assume that the protagonist also feels fear. Unless the game itself is atypical in that the player's experience is by design not that of the protagonist.

 

But the crux of my thoughts is that MatPat makes two assertions: that 4's protagonist is the Bite of '87 victim, and that the Bite's victim couldn't have nightmares/feel fear.

 

So which one is incorrect? *rubs chin*

[sailing101]

Well, if everything does add up the way I think it does, then that means I know who the purple guy is.

[Ripan]

Where does he get the idea that damage to the frontal lobe makes you completely unable to have nightmares? As far as I've heard, science haven't yet managed to quite pin down which parts of the brain are responsible for creating dreams and nightmares.

 

and to that... a nightmare is only a dream that we find frightening, implying that in order to have a nightmare, you must be able to have a fear response.

 

As far as I can see, fear response is connected to the amygdala, the insular cortex and the limbic system (detecting and interpreting threatening stimuli), which is located in the very center of the brain, and the frontal lobe processes and responds to the stimuli. Persons with removed temporal lobes have expressed decreased ability to feel fear, and damage to the frontal lobe seems to have a similar response.

 

I'm just saying we use our entire brain, so one can't just claim that because the frontal lobe is missing or damaged, nothing in the rest of the mechanism will work. It may be wonky and distorted, but as long as the other parts are functional there could still be something.

 

In the Phineas Gage case it is frequently mentioned that he expressed behavioral changes, but not much about emotion. In some places it's mentioned that he could easily fly into a rage, some even claim psychopathy, but since it's a famous story it is also infamous for having been distorted and exaggerated.

In the end, I can't find anything about any emotional changes in Gage, merely behavioral changes mostly related to social decency.

 

 

Oh hey, here's an idea-out-of-nowhere: we're not playing as the victim of the bite, but as someone who witnessed it. The older brother is probably too old for that room, but a young someone may have seen it.

Edited August 4, 2015 by Ripan

[demonicvampiregirl]

the DLC is not related to fnaf4

the DLC is not a prequel or sequel

FNAF is done.

The movie may possibly explain everything, but as far as things go the games are done.

SoulKing I can't quite understand why you are so dead set on everything. You seem to come and brush off every single persons statements rather roughly each time you post.

 

Again there is still a lot left to be revealed. Scott is very finicky on when his games come out and are completed. The DLC thing is meant to be for FNAF4 so why would it be unrelated if it was a DLC for said game?

[Kith]

From the video: "Removal of the frontal lobe significantly impacts the victim's ability to process certain types of stimuli, specifically fear stimuli."

 

He goes on to state that the lack of inhibition stems from the lack of fear and anxiety, as well as a lack of focus and concentration which would prevent the victim from being able to actually act out the gameplay as presented.

 

There's also the assertion that the frontal lobe is responsible for controlling dreams, and that while someone who's had a frontal lobotomy can still dream, they can't nightmare due to the lack of fear/anxiety response. There also were apparently patients who had the procedure done voluntarily because of recurring nightmares in order to stop them from happening. One case is presented, as the patient's nightmare was about being chased by ferocious animals; post-op, the patient only reported a "nice dream with some nice animals" occurring.

 

 

Despite his statement that there's been a lot of research done on those who've had the procedure done in the past, he doesn't say whether it was all adults or whether there were children in any of the studies. It's possible that the symptoms here either weren't true in every case, or children react differently to the injury.

 

Or Scott meant that the game isn't about the '87 victim at all.

[Lythiaren]

MatPat was more pointing out the contradiction, I think.

 

That said, the crux of the video in question was more arguing that no matter how horrifying the animatronics appear to us as the players, the protagonist (if it's the Bite victim) would not have the same kind of visceral fear reaction to the same images as we have. Furthermore he talks about how the frontal lobe is also linked to our ability to focus on tasks, such as neurotically checking doors and flipping a flashlight on and off for six hours. I believe the assertion was that the kid would've just gotten bored and gone back to bed after seeing nothing the first few tries.

 

Anyway.

 

I'm still going to cling to the '83 timeline myself. I'll suspend the apparent Toy Bonnie figure as an enigma for now; it can't be explained away without using a headcanon and I'd rather use facts presented ingame. In FNAF2, they keep the Toy models in active use at least until Jeremy's final night shift, regardless of what is in use during his day shift. Phone Guy won't stop talking about how they're acting funny around adults but interacting fine with kids. They also keep the partially-scavenged classic models in Parts/Maintenance. This means if the FNAF4 bite is in fact the Bite of '87, the kid would have seen Chica or Foxy at some point. He was there for three four consecutive days, the chances of him not seeing either of them while he's there are incredibly slim. Furthermore, on the day before his party, someone locks him in Parts/Maintenance. What do we see in there? Spring Bonnie parts, a spare Fredbear, a bare endoskeleton... but no Chica, no Foxy, no faceless Bonnie or brown Freddy. The game makes it pretty clear there are only two characters at this location.

 

I'm going to have to conclude that FNAF4 cannot possibly be the Bite of '87. There are four Freddy Fazbear characters but only two animatronics at the pizzeria. It has to be very shortly after the simultaneous springlock failure incident, just as Fazbear Entertainment had to rush to find replacement costumes to use in place of the springlock suits, and build new animatronics for their new characters.

 

1983.

Edited August 5, 2015 by Lythiaren

[nlechoppa]

MatPat was more pointing out the contradiction, I think.

 

That said, the crux of the video in question was more arguing that no matter how horrifying the animatronics appear to us as the players, the protagonist (if it's the Bite victim) would not have the same kind of visceral fear reaction to the same images as we have. Furthermore he talks about how the frontal lobe is also linked to our ability to focus on tasks, such as neurotically checking doors and flipping a flashlight on and off for six hours. I believe the assertion was that the kid would've just gotten bored and gone back to bed after seeing nothing the first few tries.

 

Anyway.

 

I'm still going to cling to the '83 timeline myself. I'll suspend the apparent Toy Bonnie figure as an enigma for now; it can't be explained away without using a headcanon and I'd rather use facts presented ingame. In FNAF2, they keep the Toy models in active use at least until Jeremy's final night shift, regardless of what is in use during his day shift. Phone Guy won't stop talking about how they're acting funny around adults but interacting fine with kids. They also keep the partially-scavenged classic models in Parts/Maintenance. This means if the FNAF4 bite is in fact the Bite of '87, the kid would have seen Chica or Foxy at some point. He was there for three four consecutive days, the chances of him not seeing either of them while he's there are incredibly slim. Furthermore, on the day before his party, someone locks him in Parts/Maintenance. What do we see in there? Spring Bonnie parts, a spare Fredbear, a bare endoskeleton... but no Chica, no Foxy, no faceless Bonnie or brown Freddy. The game makes it pretty clear there are only two characters at this location.

 

I'm going to have to conclude that FNAF4 cannot possibly be the Bite of '87. There are four Freddy Fazbear characters but only two animatronics at the pizzeria. It has to be very shortly after the simultaneous springlock failure incident, just as Fazbear Entertainment had to rush to find replacement costumes to use in place of the springlock suits, and build new animatronics for their new characters.

 

1983.

I'm pretty sure if something happened in 1983, we would be told.

[Lythiaren]

I'm pretty sure if something happened in 1983, we would be told.

Yes. Using a game, perhaps.

Edited August 5, 2015 by Lythiaren

[nlechoppa]

Why do they tell us about '87 but not 1983 if you are correct.

[Lythiaren]

If I'm correct, then Scott is telling us about 1983. Using the same bait-and-switch tactics he used to tell us about 1987 in FNAF2, of course.

 

The mystery of the Bite itself is the carrot he keeps dangling tantalizingly just out of our reach so we keep coming back for more. Brilliant, really.

Edited August 5, 2015 by Lythiaren

[Kith]

If that's the case, it would seem to indicate that the "What do you think you see?" in the trailer applies to what we immediately assumed about the incident in addition to what's happening during each night... Especially since the only year that is actually mentioned within the game itself is 1983, where all the promotional material and most of the "easter eggs" in the code reference '87.

Edited August 5, 2015 by Kith

[Lythiaren]

Indeed. What do we think we see?

[Ripan]

Sooo, even if the only animatronics available at the time of the incident was Spring Bonnie and Fredbear, the kid still has nightmares featuring hellish versions of Foxy and Chica (arguably Freddy too) as well?

Could that be suggestive of more previous trauma (brother's bullying or something else?) blending into the shock of the incident?

... You know, thinking about it, Spring Bonnie was present at the incident and during the mini games when the kid was alone at the restaurant before the incident, yet there is no Nightmare Spring Bonnie appearing. The kid also do not have a toy of the Spring Bonnie (Fun with Plushtrap is probably not part of the kid's story), but toy Mangle also appear in what seems to be a sibling's room.

Edited August 5, 2015 by Ripan

[sailing101]

It has to be very shortly after the simultaneous springlock failure incident, just as Fazbear Entertainment had to rush to find replacement costumes to use in place of the springlock suits, and build new animatronics for their new characters.

 

1983.

If that were the case, then we would not have seen someone wearing the costumes at all. This is not the case. In fnaf 3, Phone guy says to not question the appropriateness of the replacement costumes, meaning that Management quickly pulled together replacements for the performers to wear. This means that in the immediate aftermath of the Springlock failure incident, the Spring suits were not being used.

 

The bite shown also can't be said to be the Springlock failure, as Fredbear was already in animatronic mode, so the animatronic components were already clamped down.

 

 

If making a theory work requires Willfully ignoring a piece of glaring evidence, then that means that said theory is most likely wrong.

The toy animatronics, even if they weren't involved in the incident itself, are central to this. The minigames that take place at the pizzeria most likely all take place on the same day, the day of the party. The place is decorated for a party after all. How often does a place like this have multiple parties planned several days in a row?

Edited August 5, 2015 by sailing101

[Kith]

The place is decorated for a party after all. How often does a place like this have multiple parties planned several days in a row?

To be fair, when I went to Showbiz Pizza and Chuck E. Cheese as a kid, they had multiple parties a day, sometimes at the same time. So that's not necessarily relevant.

 

 

The instant retirement of the spring suits is a bit of a problem, as is the fact that the nightmares involve Chica, Bonnie, Foxy and Freddy. The latter, though, is at least mildly subverted by the fact that the minigame room has these characters in it in some sort of large toy form (with Foxy headless), which could mean that the nightmare is populated not only by Fredbear, but by transformed versions of his "friends" from the room. Which makes me wonder why this is the case. Is it because those "friends" are replicated in the masks the other children are wearing at the time of the incident?

 

And Mangle being there is... odd.

 

Also, as to the retirement of the spring suits, Phone Guy is very explicit that an employee bleeding out is only a problem if they do it in front of customers as opposed to in the safe room. This would mean that the "multiple and simultaneous spring-lock failure" must have either involved the employee(s) having been injured and dying in full view before reaching the safe room or an incident involving a customer directly... Which this doesn't seem to be, as Fredbear was empty at the time.

[Lythiaren]

Your theory also wilfully ignores glaring evidence, sailing. You failed to account for the absence of any of the classic or toy models anywhere in the building, and you also missed a crucial detail I'll get into later in this post. Your 1987 theory is also likely to be wrong. I also never said the FNAF4 bite was the simultaneous springlock failure incident itself.

 

Also, most moderately-sized towns have at least a few hundred children in them. That means lots of birthdays and pizza parties happen all the time. It's not at all unreasonable to assume that a pizza party place would be decorated for parties for several days in a row. Even the FNAF1 place was decorated for a party every single night, and it was on its last legs. I went to Chuck E. Cheese's all the time as a kid and there were parties going on every day. You don't need a birthday to have a pizza party, it was just a thing people did in the 80's and early 90's. A lot!

 

Consider the following:

 

1) There is no sign of our colourful cast of characters in the restaurant in FNAF4, except as masks. Not even in Parts/Service. Even the bear portraits are yellow. It cannot possibly be that final party where Jeremy is posted on day shift, because if it was, we'd at least see a poster of the other suits. But there aren't any. Only character masks. This establishes that the classic suits are not installed at the time of the FNAF4 bite.

 

2) Regardless of when the Toy models came into use, the classic models were there for a while before that. It's not economical to redesign your entire cast of characters only a few months in. Furthermore, the Toy models were in use for quite some time before Jeremy was hired; Phone Guy tasks about how they tried to retrofit the old models with facial recognition tech, but gave up and began using the classic suits for parts. Since they were partially scavenged (and I don't necessarily mean Bonnie's missing face, though one of his arms is gone, and his remaining hand and one foot stripped; classic Chica's jaw hinges appear to have been taken out, resulting in the split head, and her hands and eyelids have been completely removed), this suggests the Toy models were around long enough for them to suffer some wear and require some part changes by the time Jeremy is hired. Additionally, they were malfunctioning at night for some time beforehand. The night guard before Jeremy had complained about the animatronics attempting to enter the office, and they preemptively gave Jeremy a Freddy mask to protect himself. This pushes the date of FNAF4 farther and farther back, because it clearly occurs before the classic suits (not to be confused with the springsuits) are even put in. In contrast, if this really did happen in 1987 and the Toy models are present as you say, where are they? And where are the multitudes of posters we see all over the walls in FNAF2?

 

3) Fredbear had a TV show that aired at some point in 1983, titled Fredbear & Friends. It's shown on the TV in the minigame and it's not just the title. We don't know if the TV easter egg is the show coming on, or if it's a rerun, or a VHS. But we clearly see our brown Freddy, blue Bonnie, and Foxy and Chica on the screen:

 

(

)

The toys are not based on the animatronics, it's the other way around! So, we can toss my initial suggestion that Fazbear Entertainment had to establish new characters for the suits they had to pick up after the springlock incident (so I was wrong on that, red herring'd by FNAF3, d'oh). We are shown pretty clearly that these characters were already established prior to the acquisition by Fazbear Entertainment, since they're on a Fredbear show that was successful enough to have its own toy line. But the rest of my theory still holds, and in fact the hole you originally saw as a glaring flaw is now filled: the "Toy" Bonnie, brown Freddy, Foxy, and Chica toys are very clearly TV show merchandise. Speculation: the "Mangle" toy could be the mangled head of the kid's toy Foxy, gutted by the bullying older brother to make the mask he uses to torment our bite victim, or a failed first attempt at crafting such a mask.

 

4) There is no reason to build animatronics that can walk around independently if you don't intend to let them walk around independently. You can make an argument that if this was the Bite of '87 the classic suits could have been too far along on their development to change them, but there is no such excuse for the Toy suits that were in use in late 1987. If the classic suits aren't even in use yet, and this is the Bite that led them to shut down daytime wandering mode, then there's no reason the Toy models would have even been built to walk around independently at all. And since the accident was caused by reckless patrons, there's still no reason to believe that keeping all animatronics on stage would prevent a recurrence. I mean, it happened on the stage to begin with. Keeping their suits all on stage wouldn't have changed anything. And during the events of FNAF2, at least from the beginning through Night 6, all the active animatronics have daytime wandering mode on, because Phone Guy talks every night about their AI glitching when they encounter adults.

 

5) Even if they pulled the spring suits out in 1987 for that last party in November, they did not get rid of all the other animatronics at the same time. They're still on stage for Fritz's shift that night, including the classic suits in Parts/Service. Again, we don't see that in FNAF4.

 

So, once again I have no choice but to conclude that 1987 is not possible. Since 1983 is the only other year we have to go on, I'm sticking with that. Since the spring suits are in active use for the few days we see them in FNAF4, and we're now free from the character paradox that would have corraled us into a very short and unlikely timeline right after the springlock failure incident, this opens up a wider window where the FNAF4 bite can happen and still make sense. So I revise my theory: the events of FNAF4 could be before the springlock accident entirely.

 

I've done more research and found evidence that both supports my theory and closes the hole you found. Where's your evidence to back up your theory?

 

(editing repeatedly to correct phone grammar)

Edited August 6, 2015 by Lythiaren

[sailing101]

Your counterargument misinterprets what I mean by toy animatronics.

I don't mean just toys of the animatronics, I mean merchandise of the third generation 'Toy' style animatronics.

The mangled Mangle toy can't be the missing Foxy plush's head, as the mangle's second head, the animatronic skull, is among the pieces strewn about. Both of the mangle's heads are present, therefore, it is unlikely to be the missing foxy head. One child that can be spoken to has a collection of Toy character figurines. All three generations are represented as various forms of merchandise, from fredbear, to mangle.

 

The toy generation of animatronics were only used at the FNAF 2 location, having ben specifically built for the Franchise's grand reopening in that location. This being because the previous two, Fredbear's diner, and the unnamed sister location, had closed down. Two locations. The original Fredbear's diner, with Fredbear and Spring Bonnie, and a second location, built by Fazbear entertainment after they acquired the rights to the characters. This is the logical place where the original Fazbear four were first used, before both locations closed.

 

You need to take everything into account. The simple fact that the Toy Generation, canonically redesigned versions of the Fazbear four, exist, means that the First two locations are closed.

 

We may not see them in person, but the merchandise is shown multiple times.

 

 

Fazbear entertainment is a Company like Hasbro. They have TV shows, they have Merchandise of the characters, and their main sell is the Pizza chain. They can't sell toys of a main character if that toy DOSN'T reflect that character's appearance. Nobody would buy a pink Foxy if the Real Foxy wasn't also pink.

Edited August 6, 2015 by sailing101

[Kith]

While we can't be sure that the girl's toys are the "toy" versions of the animatronics we see in 2, Mangle is a definite anomaly.

[sailing101]

And with that, every theory that requires a year outside 1987 holds less water.

 

(personally, I'm still on the fence as to exactly what happened, I just want everyone to know that the Toy generation is represented, therefore if Scott ever does say it's not the bite of 87, and does not explain the presence of the Mangle, I can raise an angry mob of plothole angered theorists.)

Edited August 6, 2015 by sailing101

[Kith]

Though even Mangle itself is weird; it's not white anywhere. The entire head and arm are pink... and come to think of it, it should just be the hand and not the whole arm. *headscratch* Is this really Mangle? Was it originally a normal Foxy that was painted/modified to make it more "girly" (possibly smashed up by the brother)? Was it a "some assembly required" toy marketed to girls?

Edited August 6, 2015 by Kith

[sailing101]

For me there really is only one question remaining.

 

How did the room where Springtrap was discovered get boarded up?

 

The location is clearly the FNAF 1 building, with Springtrap being in one of the 'safe' rooms mentioned in FNAF 3. The building is in a worn down, abandoned state, so who would have boarded up that room?

 

 

It couldn't have happened before the second game (which was the conclusion matpat came too, despite the fact that this would make the entire game impossible to have happened, as the phone guy states that the pizzeria is being shut down after night six, so there would be no FNAF 2 at all according to his theory) because the murders of five children happen over that week. So, that means that the purple man died after the events of FNAF 1.

 

So how did the room get boarded up again?

Edited August 6, 2015 by sailing101

[Lythiaren]

The simple fact that the Toy Generation, canonically redesigned versions of the Fazbear four, exist, means that the First two locations are closed.

 

We may not see them in person, but the merchandise is shown multiple times.

Did you... see the gif? The TV screen clearly shows the four characters in the Toy suit colour schemes (including blue Bonnie) in a TV series clearly labeled Fredbear & Friends and dated 1983. Not Freddy, not Fazbear. Fredbear. It's in the show clear as day. I didn't miss anything. The "Toy animatronic" merchandise isn't of the Toy models at all. Those are toys of Fredbear and his friends as seen in the show.

 

Fredbear & Friends

 

You also didn't give me any evidence to support your claim that these are the Toy models in the first place. You've failed to counter the fact that there is no sign of their existence within the pizzeria itself. FNAF2's location had posters of the characters on every wall, posters that are conspicuously and completely absent in FNAF4. There's absolutely no sign of any animatronics at all aside from Spring Bonnie and Fredbear. Show your work or you're arguing against the game itself.

 

The mangled Foxy toy is not a toy of the Mangle as seen in FNAF2. You don't make a toy of a jumble of broken pieces. Toys eventually become jumbles of broken pieces. It's a broken toy. A toy that looks suspiciously like it's been partially bleached and dissected for a teenager's "Science".

[Kith]

For me there really is only one question remaining.

 

How did the room where Springtrap was discovered get boarded up?

 

The location is clearly the FNAF 1 building, with Springtrap being in one of the 'safe' rooms mentioned in FNAF 3. The building is in a worn down, abandoned state, so who would have boarded up that room?

 

 

It couldn't have happened before the second game (which was the conclusion matpat came too, despite the fact that this would make the entire game impossible to have happened, as the phone guy states that the pizzeria is being shut down after night six, so there would be no FNAF 2 at all according to his theory) because the murders of five children happen over that week. So, that means that the purple man died after the events of FNAF 1.

 

So how did the room get boarded up again?

I would say that it depends.

 

* If we go with the '87 theory for 4, that means the safe rooms wouldn't have been boarded up until after 2 anyway. The problem with this is that the tapes in 3 would seem to contradict it, as the locations were still open and running after the safe room closure.

 

* If we go with the '83 theory for 4, the safe rooms were originally shut before 2, but at least one of the spring suits was the "spare, in the back" that was taken and used during 2. This would mean that the 1 location is one of the older FFP buildings from before 2, renovated for use after the budget cuts. Depending on when the 3 minigames took place, the room was boarded up again either during the renovation (after the addition of the animatronics but before opening day) or after the place closed down again.

[nlechoppa]

Did you... see the gif? The TV screen clearly shows the four characters in the Toy suit colour schemes (including blue Bonnie) in a TV series clearly labeled Fredbear & Friends and dated 1983. Not Freddy, not Fazbear. Fredbear. It's in the show clear as day. I didn't miss anything. The "Toy animatronic" merchandise isn't of the Toy models at all. Those are toys of Fredbear and his friends as seen in the show.

 

Fredbear & Friends

 

You also didn't give me any evidence to support your claim that these are the Toy models in the first place. You've failed to counter the fact that there is no sign of their existence within the pizzeria itself. FNAF2's location had posters of the characters on every wall, posters that are conspicuously and completely absent in FNAF4. There's absolutely no sign of any animatronics at all aside from Spring Bonnie and Fredbear. Show your work or you're arguing against the game itself.

 

The mangled Foxy toy is not a toy of the Mangle as seen in FNAF2. You don't make a toy of a jumble of broken pieces. Toys eventually become jumbles of broken pieces. It's a broken toy. A toy that looks suspiciously like it's been partially bleached and dissected for a teenager's "Science".

It clearly shows Freddy and co as well. And we know that those didn't come into being at Fredbear's diner. So I conclude.

The toys were scrapped on the day of the party at the FNAF2 location, and the old animatronics are withered and not used.

Edited August 6, 2015 by Soulking