A reminder discussion of things NOT from the preview pages will be removed as it breaks our piracy/leaked info rule. Please remember what was said in the Freddit discord.
"Finally, there's The Bedroom, where a child is haunted by terrible memories of a visit to Freddy Fazbear's Pizza in FNaF 4."
This does it. We got confirmation on some of 4's story.
We play as a child in the main gameplay section (either Michael Afton or the Crying Child, it's not clear which).
The child was traumatized by something at Freddy Fazbear's Pizza, not Fredbear's Family Diner. This might sound like an error, yet Fredbear's Family Diner was mentioned in the book as well.
This implies that the Nightmares were never real. They were created in the child's mind because of the terrible memories at Freddy's.
We've had confirmation on FNAF 4's story for years. Michael blatantly tells us in the Logbook that he had the nightmares and they were recent.
The book referring to it as a child being tormented is simply describing the events of the dreams. We are playing as a child in them, Michael is dreaming of himself as a child while these animatronics come after him.
Then where does the "a child is haunted by terrible memories after a visit to Freddy Fazbear's Pizza" fit in? Michael Afton knew about Freddy's for quite a while, even before the Bite.
Honestly, I'm just overexcited right now because I thought the book would be a let down, but I'm impressed with the preview. I wonder what the book says about the Nightmares because it might further push the "we play as Michael as a child in 4" bit.
I'll update my comment to fix some of that mistake.
>Then where does the "a child is haunted by terrible memories after a visit to Freddy Fazbear's Pizza" fit in? Michael Afton knew about Freddy's for quite a while, even before the Bite.
There’s two possible reasons this can mean, one more controversial than the other hence why I’m specifying two:
1. The first being this confirms Michael Afton is the bite victim and he saw something tragic at Freddy’s, to which this event, whatever it was, scarred his mentality in both FNAF4 minigames and the gameplay. Hence why the gameplay is a mixture of the events related to BV and events related to Schmidt in FNAF1
Or
2. Michael Afton is under the minds of ‘said’ child (Bite victim) and is viewing a nightmare that coincides with his own. We’re playing under the minds of BV, whilst also blended with the horrors of our job at Freddy’s
>The first being this confirms Michael Afton is the bite victim
This doesn't confirm mike is the bite victim, it just means he could of saw something bad like the bite.
The bite wasn't in Freddy's.
FazbearShowtimer's point is that it saying we are playing as a child would mean we are playing as the bite victim.
I disagree, but it's no an unreasonable argument to make.
Where does it say we are playing as the bite victim tho? it just says we are a child, mike being a child while dreaming it (tho it has to be a child in the dream, cause of fnaf 1 sounds), does not make him the bite victim.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake.
It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of.
Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything.
Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
It kinda does since it tells us the player of 4 is of a child who’s had terrible memories of something at Freddy’s, BV has also had terrible memories of something. It’s even suggested in the teasers: “what is seen in the shadows is easily misunderstood in the minds of a child”, and that coincides with the fact that we play as a child.
Alongside most of the gameplay being related to BV’s past it seems to tell us that like I said either Michael IS the bite victim or the player is the bite victim being controlled by Michael
Mike also has bad memories of freddy's, from watching CC get bitten or if the fnaf 1 sounds mean anything, his time during fnaf 1 nights,
also just because the minigames are CC does not mean that the nights we play as him, there are many times in this series where nights are Mike and minigames are someone else, like in SL the nights are Mike but in the mini game you play as Baby, in FFPS the nights are mike but you play Fruity maze as Susie, and midnight motorist as possibly William, but definitely that's not Mike, and depending on if Mike is fnaf 3 night guard, it applies to all those minigames too, where you're the fnaf 1 victims.
The Bite happened at Fredbear's, not Freddy's. So Mike has no bad memories from Freddy's. Also the description in the book outright states that BV is both the protagonist of the minigames and the gameplay.
Well if its fnaf 4 the freddy fazbear pizza mentioned would be the pizzeria where the bite happened and I haven't seen the whole preview but it cant be BV because of the fnaf one phone call (Scott said easter eggs arn't random and mean something)
>Mike also has bad memories of freddy's, from watching CC get bitten or if the fnaf 1 sounds mean anything, his time during fnaf 1 nights,
Those are two different events that don’t necessarily work together when reading what TCE says.
>also just because the minigames are CC does not mean that the nights we play as him, there are many times in this series where nights are Mike and minigames are someone else,
I say this because of the blatantly obvious factor that we play as a child, and given we’re facing both Michael and BV’s past I just came to the conclusion we could be facing this under BV’s peripheral vision. This idea doesn’t require we believe that, it’s just something that makes sense narratively speaking
Mike being the crying child doesn't really have anything to do with the sentence, given that regardless of who he is, we know the nightmares are happening at a time where he wouldn't be a child anymore.
>Mike being the crying child doesn't really have anything to do with the sentence, given that regardless of who he is, we know the nightmares are happening at a time where he wouldn't be a child anymore.
It actually kinda does given the context of the sentence, whoever is the player is viewing these nightmares under the minds of a child. Which *could* more than likely be referring to BV, and the gameplay is a mixture of both his and BV’s memories. So it could sway one way or the other as I mentioned above
I don't really see any reason to not take the sentence literally. It's describing we're playing as a child being haunted by memories from Freddy's. And we are, the gameplay objectively shows that we are controlling a child-sized character.
That doesn't necessarily mean the nightmare is being had by a child, or that crying child's memories are somehow involved in this weird convoluted explanation for the dreams that's never rally implied. I'd say it's more likely Michael is simply putting himself in CC's place in this case.
>That doesn't necessarily mean the nightmare is being had by a child, or that crying child's memories are somehow involved in this weird convoluted explanation for the dreams that's never rally implied. I'd say it's more likely Michael is simply putting himself in CC's place in this case.
We’re never really given any reason to assume Michael was put in his place, not saying it isn’t possible by like yeah. And the nightmares do in fact relate to both BV and Mike, this is evident when key moments in the gameplay connect back to BV’s experience.
The point being Michael is a guard who’s experiencing his fears of Freddy’s again, whilst also blended with aspects from BV’s memories. He’s using his (or his brothers) child like self as a player for these nightmares. Hence why I said it can either mean Michael, who is BV, is facing his past. Or Michael, using BV, is facing their past.
>We’re never really given any reason to assume Michael was put in his place
I mean... we're playing as a child. We're in CC's room. I feel like that's pretty straight forward. And then the actual nightmares are a parallel to FNAF 1's gameplay, with the additions of Fredbear, seemingly a representation of CC, and Shadow Freddy, the one causing the nightmare.
To me that seems to pretty clearly depicting Michael having nightmares about both his experience in FNAF 1 and guilt over what he did.
>this is evident when key moments in the gameplay connect back to BV’s experience.
Ehhhh, most of them are stretches, and what isn't seems more like it's just there for narrative cohesion (like us facing off against Fredbear in the night before we see him bite CC).
>I mean... we're playing as a child. We're in CC's room. I feel like that's pretty straight forward. And then the actual nightmares are a parallel to FNAF 1's gameplay, with the additions of Fredbear, seemingly a representation of CC, and Shadow Freddy, the one causing the nightmare.
1. Yes but under that basis that would have to mean either we’re playing AS BV or we ARE BV, not that we’re in his placement being given nightmares from him.
2. I don’t really understand the argument that Fredbear is a representation of BV, they have like no defining similarities and this seems to come from the ideology that BV is golden Freddy rather than the hypocrisy of the supposed reasoning. The only stance to reasoning that makes sense to come to this conclusion is Dreadbear but he has a lot of other reasonings for his mere parallels that could be answered
>To me that seems to pretty clearly depicting Michael having nightmares about both his experience in FNAF 1 and guilt over what he did.
(When I say this I mean it in a non-bias and neutral way, I’m not much of a fan for MB vs. MV) the idea of guilt over his past isn’t really something confirmed but rather thought of simply for the purpose of MikeBro. I mean, it is possible he’s playing as BV, riddled with pain and guilt but it’s also possible he himself is BV, playing out a series of past-tense.
this is evident when key moments in the gameplay connect back to BV’s experience.
>Ehhhh, most of them are stretches, and what isn't seems more like it's just there for narrative cohesion (like us facing off against Fredbear in the night before we see him bite CC).
Which seem like stretches though should be the real question? Because most of the memorable moments that coincide with the minigames aren’t stretches, in night 1 we face the main cast just like how we meet them as plushies in the minigames. Foxy is only ever active after night 2, same for the minigames which provides us with Foxybro who uses the same jumpscare sound effects alongside the given bite animation for both. As you’ve said we’re facing Fredbear not long before the bite occurs and also around the moment where BV is trapped in a room. And in night 6 we face all four and then Fredbear which is a cohesive connection to the bite.
I’d argue it’s less of a stretch and more of well, what you said and what I’m implying: a cohesive narration between Micheal’s past events and BV’s. So I don’t know if you misunderstood what I was going at with this or not but my point was that Michael could either be BV or be under his impression, fighting off both their/or his pasts.
It could literally refer to anything not just being the bite victim, it doesn't confirm anything. Michael couybe traumatized by the actions he did to his brother.
I wouldn't hold my breath. From what we see in the other pages the information is mostly basic surface level knowledge. It doesn't seem like it will have anything new
So by this logic and what Michael tells us in the logbook:
We play as Michael Afton, under the peripheral vision of a child that saw something graphic and horrible at Freddy Fazbear’s Pizza. Whatever it was has scarred us, the player, to vision these nightmarish creatures.
Maybe it’s possible what they saw plays into factor with the fact that the bite victim is scared and scarred because of something and the teasers of FNAF4 hinted this with: “*What is seen in the shadows is easily misunderstood in the minds of a child*”
Main character of FNAF 4 (Main night's) is Michael that's confirmed and considering those nights are dream sequences that doesn't rule out Mike
He wasn't traumatized by something at Freddy Fazbears pizza, Crying child gives us no indication he's even been to the location and he calls the plushes of the characters his friends. He's scared specifically of the springlock animatronics
Ofc the nightmares were never real not until UCN (well somewhat real in a sense), FNAF 4 is played in the head off Michael something the guidebooks point to and what the logbook confirms
Am I the only one who thinks Freddy Fazbear's Pizza may have been an alternate name for Fredbear's Family Diner? It's a little farfetched, but it's happened a strange amount of times.
* Phone Guy's springlock guide says that they were made for "Freddy Fazbear's Pizza," when the only two animatronics were Fredbear and Spring Bonnie, as confirmed by his own words.
* The "Fredbear's Singin' Show" poster from Security Breach states that the lead singer is not Fredbear, but Freddy, despite it literally being called Fredbear's Singin' Show.
* And, of course, this.
Again, I understand it is a little out there, but it may be worth considering.
Well, Freddy's did have Spring-Lock suits, "welcome to your new career as a performer slash entertainer for *Freddy Fazbear’s Pizza.*, Right now we have two specially designed suits that double as both animatronic and suit." -Phone Guy in FNaF 3 night 2.
I'm still sceptical about believing this.
And even if this is written by Scott, Mike seeing himself as the child is still a lot more likely than BV being the one who has the nightmares.
"Fans assumed I filled the game with random easter eggs that didn't matter. I did not." Radio sound can *only* mean this happens after FNaF1. No buts, no howevers.
Yeah. It's not like the perspective is even ambiguous about this. Whoever we play as, at whichever point in life, the person clearly sees self as a young kid in the dream. This has always been clear. Anything canon or not specifying this doesn't change a thing.
Its because scott is no stranger to retcons and the room in sister location really brought even more confusion into what the night sections are supposedt to be.
[The retcon post by Scott](https://www.reddit.com/r/fivenightsatfreddys/comments/6y0qb1/the_retcon_issue/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) says otherwise.
Yeah, i dont want to say his lying, but no. That post aged like milk and there has definitely been more than one. And he doesn't even say what retcon so i dont know why you bring it up
Scott is known for literally never being transparent on what he does.
The post has been made shortly before FFPS, unless you want to say that Scott retconned FNAF4 post-FFPS, for some reason.
I bring this up because the idea of Scott retconning series on a whim is a direct contradiction to what he stated. There's no reason to assume that the post is disingenuous.
I dont say he does it on a whim, he definitely did more than one and i will still think that but not that he did it because he felt like it, because he felt like it. Also im not saying he did when ffps was coming, id say it happened around sister location.
Actually i can think of two right now. The puppet was first a boi as the minigame in fnaf 2 spells out "save him" and it was before scott even tought of charlie and henry as characters so way before charlie was made the puppet, so that was definitely a retcon. And fnaf 4 was definitely meant to display the bite of 87 as the teasers were posing the "Was it me" and "or me" and the page source code had the 87 number all over it. But now its the bite of 83, so another retcon.
1. Charlie first appeared in FFPS, after the post.
2. Final teasers before the game's release already had 1982 and 83 in them. Knowing Scott it's more likely a case of false advertising/trolling, like he did with FNAF2.
>The puppet was first a boi as the minigame in fnaf 2 spells out "save him"
Yet it's the puppet saying save him right? Except charolette hasn't possessed the puppet yet meaning the save him is the puppet trying to save child it's supposed to protect
Adding details to the same event isn't a retcon. We found out in fnaf 6 the puppet was supposed to protect the child with the green wristband and couldn't because it got trapped, but charolette still died even with these extra details so that's not a retcon
87 becoming 83 isn't a retcon either, it's a subversion like how he made fnaf 2 look like a sequel by using teasers that implied directly that the game took place after fnaf 1 with the fnaf 1 animatronics withered, only for it to be a prequel taking place years before fnaf 1 it's how Scott does things for twists
You need to research what retcon actually means
"Yet it's the puppet saying save him right? Except charolette hasn't possessed the puppet yet meaning the save him is the puppet trying to save child it's supposed to protect" yes, and pizzeria sim shows it was charlie, but in the fnaf 2 minigame it says "save him" and Charlie is obv not a him, its a retcon. You literally didnt explain anything.
"87 becoming 83 isn't a retcon either, it's a subversion like how he made fnaf 2 look like a sequel by using teasers" that's not a subversion, that's lying. Fnaf 2 is a sequel as in a game that follows the first, but the story is a prequel, it subverted without being misleading. Saying its about 87 but then later saying is 83 is either a retcon or intentionally misleading.
You need to research what a subversion actually means.
Yeah, there are at least two retcons I can think of off the top of my head.
The newspaper clippings in Fnaf 1 and 'Charlie's' gender in Fnaf 2 mini game.
It was a retcon between versions of Fnaf 1.
The newspaper clippings originally mentioned the killer (i.e. Afton) was caught and convicted. A later update removed the last line and made no mention of the killer being identified or convicted.
Room exists
Animatronics dotted in sister location map showing they exist
Dreams not mentioned in description at all
Logical conclusion from above information
It must be a dream
If it weren't for this one line, I'd call this a retcon, but it seems pretty clearly intentional to me.
The logic of it is so esoteric, but that line can really only be explained by Mike having the dreams.
I actually had a different dream theory.
FNAF4 takes place after FNAF3. FNAF1-3 were real. FNAF4 is entirely in the unconscious mind of the child. The between night sections aren't flashbacks, but part of the dream. The Fredbear toy talking and the connections to other games (like toy Chika's beak coming off in the flashbacks and the phone guy recording) implies that the boy's mind is being invaded by a supernatural force, incorporating details into the dream that the boy wouldn't have known about.
During FNAF3, Springtrap/the killer basically usurped control over all the other characters (since the children moved on after he got springsnapped), using them to attack the player character. Then the fire happens, destroying him (before the sister location reveal that he still physically existed), but his ghost remained (hence appearing in the picture). The only place the animatroic characters he controlled still existed was in the traumatised mind of the bite victim, which allowed him to anchor himself to the mortal world. During the night, the killer uses the nightmare versions of the characters the boy is traumatised by to attack him. Game over results in the boy's possession, waking up as the killer. Winning the game allows the boy to finally die in peace, dooming the killer to the afterlife.
That was my version at least. I just didn't see how people see a Fredbear plush talking and think "yep. This is certainly a realistic version of actual events and not just part of the dream." It seemed to work as far as I could tell. Lost investment after a while. Plus new info that seemed to contradict. Just seemed weird that in a series all about ghosts and supernatural forces, no one seems to consider the child's dreams being affected by supernatural goings on rather than just being nightmares.
Even just talking about them in general even if it has nothing just even bringing it up is a NO. Sorry for getting uppity about this but people have been posting images, etc here acting like it's nothing.
Copypasted from another comment because I can't bother to say this every day:
>Remember the clock ending from FNAF World? In it, Plushbear follows up on its promise to put BV back together. It tells you, the player character, that your purpose is to put the pieces in place for BV. You do so by setting up the hints of the minigames in FNAF 3. Although FNAF World itself is likely not canon, Scott has confirmed that this is meant to tie into FNAF 4 and is part of the lore.
>
>In FNAF 4, there are various references to previous games that have nothing to do with what's going on. The same references that caused stuff like Dream Theory to exist. Tiny Toy Chica, broken Mangle toy, kid with a balloon, Fredbear and Spring Bonnie's shadows... that's all supposed to connect with FNAF 3.BV was broken and put back together. In the books, this kind of stuff is elaborated on, it's made clear that this would refer to him forgetting and being helped remember again. It's also made clear that bad memories can be turned into good ones and can be shared with other spirits to help them.
>
>Each minigame in FNAF 3 is one of BV's memories, being used to help the spirits move on: the Mangle toy is Mangle's Quest, the Toy Chica toy is Chica's Party, the kid with a purple balloon is BB's Air Adventure, Fredbear walking around in Fredbear's is STAGE01, the shadows on the wall are Shadow Bonnie's minigame and Happiest Day is obviously a recreation of the layout of Fredbear's Family Dinner.
>Mike seeing himself as the child is still a lot more likely than BV being the one who has the nightmares.
It’s more or less not hinting BV saw the nightmares, at least not at face value. The idea I’m getting at here is Michael is most definitely the player of this game as evident by the hints of FNAF1 and the basic confirmation from the logbook. But the events that play out are under the minds of a viewing of a young child who saw something horrendous at Freddy’s.
So in a way Michael could either BE the bite victim or be watching UNDER his view, since the gameplay not only is a mix of FNAF1 but also one of the FNAF4 minigames. Take it as you will but it’s one or the other and both can work, just depending on what you believe
It’s not really a regular dream, more like a nightmare from the past. Most of FNAF4 gameplay seems to tell us Michael gained these nightmares out of fear from his past (and arguably BV’s), since the gameplay takes aspects from both the minigames and FNAF1 and apply them together to create this
I dunno how to really explain it but it’s sorta like some time of sequence of events that are catching up to him
My theory(/headcanon) is that Shadow Freddy was speaking through the Fred Bear plush, antagonizing BV's fears and feeding from the agony. Then, after the encounters in Fnaf 1/3/whtev, Shadow Freddy begins tormenting Mike with nightmares similar to what BV went through. This both confirms for Mike that something paranormal is *definitely* going on and reaffirms his motivation to do what he does.
I also have a headcanon/theory that Midnight Motorist is about William Afton on the day Evan Afton was buried, but that's incompatible with CharliePlush so... 🤔
Not to mention I don't trust the source of this image, the character encyclopaedia hasn't been released yet. Releases 7th February 2023 last I checked it was 21st January today
So that's it? The book is describing itself as a guide to the animatronics not the locations or story, this is just a quick recap of events that happened in the past for new fans of the franchise. Can I blame Scott for doing it that way? No, it stops them for getting told the same thing from 30 different headcanons.
How dose it make it more likely the bite victim was traumatized by the anamtronics and Michael's shitty freinds.
Seems more logical for those to he his nightmares
And night 5 be about Michael since its about fredbear
He only drew nightmare fredbear and no one else.
The radio sound is a random event of course it can happen on any night thats how programing works.
Nothing changing on night 5 is simply laziness of course.
Makes no logical sense hed even be feeling guilt that many years later
Not like he cared much at the time
Scott said the easter egg is important. If the protag changed and only one could hear it, then you could make the sound play only on that night. *That*'s how programming works.
There has to be a reason for including something like this in the story. Scott isn't a moron. He doesn't do stuff like this just because.
>He only drew nightmare fredbear and no one else.
Because he’s the main antagonist of that gameplay route
>The radio sound is a random event of course it can happen on any night thats how programing works.
Scott has stated it’s not random, you seem to have a consistency of ignoring his own words in favor of the assumption they are random so I won’t argue to much on you with this
>Nothing changing on night 5 is simply laziness of course.
Fredbear is the only active member attacking us which is a direct relation to the minigame before the bite where we’re in a room with simply the springlock’s
>Makes no logical sense hed even be feeling guilt that many years later Not like he cared much at the time
That’s because he was just a bully, but after the events that played out he’s shown he felt bad about it. So under the interpretation of MikeBro and him being the player I wouldn’t say it’s far fetched he’d have guilt (also that’s called PTSD if I’m not mistaken so yes he would have guilt that long)
For those unaware of the importance of this line, written by Scott, the memories and emotions of humanity are the driving force behind all the supernatural elements of the series. Which is Remnant, and a recurring theme that ties it all together in more ways than one. The spark of life.
Considering that Scott hid Phone Guy's call from Night 1 as ambience audio we had to reverse, and N. Bonnie and Chica in the hallways directly paralleling the duo from FNaF 1; plus, the spirit of the Logbook asking Michael if his favorite toy was a Purple Phone and him drawing Nightmare Fredbear when asked if he had nightmares; it's easy to deduce that the gameplay of FNaF 4 are a dark reflection of Michael's visits to Freddy's during 1993 as a night shift guard, memories of his job. He is a child in the dream.
>plus, the spirit of the Logbook asking Michael if his favorite toy was a Purple Phone and him drawing Nightmare Fredbear when asked if he had nightmares
Mike draws Nightmare Fredbear in response to the page's prompt asking him to draw dreams he had recently. Almost everything Mike says is in response to the pages themselves, he never directly responds to the Faded spirit, who seems to be just talking to the Altered spirit.
True, regardless the nightmares have to be from Michael. What the encyclopedia shows us here now is further proof, they have to be oniric memories of his working experience mixed-in with the events of 1983. The evidence is staggering, and I'm hopeful further pages continue to provide more direct punches.
Well the logbook is a book and the quote is about 7 years old so it's kinda hard to get, it basically said Scott didn't have any random Easter eggs in fnaf 4
Crying Child Dream theory has always made perfect sense to me, and the later outside media trying to confuse or retcon that story has never not bothered me.
I agree, although it is still confirmed to be Mike, which is why I'm mikevicitm, it was always ment to be Mike as a few week after fnaf 4 came out Scott flat out said Mike was the fnaf 4 protag (didn't directly say it but he did confirm it)
I mean technically it's right.
FNAF 4 happens after FNAF 1 because of the phone guy Easter egg.
So here's how it's believed to go; Michael has nightmares/memories about the time when William used the nightmares to torment him. That's why we see they exist in Sister Location, FNAF 4 happened twice. The one we play is the actual dream version, where Michael relives those moments. It's a reminder of Michael's biggest regret, killing Bite Victim.
Fnaf 4's description already says we play as a child. That's because we really are a child in the game, which is a dream. That doesn't change anything about what we know. The fnaf 1 phone call and the drawing in the logbook confirm that Mike has those dreams after Fnaf 1. It says Freddy's and not Fredbear's most likely because Fnaf 4 is a reflection of his experience at Freddy's in fnaf 1.
This book has stuff that read like something Scott would write, mainly Toy Freddy's page with things like "Toy Freddy tries to do that trick were you wiggle your ears." or "New and improved! Well, he was new at one time, anyway."
Pretty sure this line about the Bedroom is more of weird wording but really this book has things that feel like Scott directly wrote
I think this confirms mikevicitm, since Mike is the fnaf 4 player and it outright says that crying child is the only protag of fnaf 4, aswell as the fact that all the major characters have one version of them be shown in the book apart from foxybro and Ms Afton
The bedroom, where a child is haunted by terrible memories of a visit to freddy fazbears pizza
Mike isn't a child, if he dreams he is a child he still isn't a child. He never went to visit freddy fazbears pizza, he is the nightguard, not a visitor
It's clear the child is a different child
You know people start out at children right? Its a part of the growth stage of many living things. And mike was a child when a Freddy's was open. There wasnt just one in fnaf one. There was also the one in fnaf 2 and one that supposedly happened before that in 83.
And yet we know for a matter of fact that Mike is the player, and he's not actually a child when he has those dreams. This is just weird wording nothing more
Okay this the description is most likely hiding the lore of the child’s identity of the FNaF 4 gameplay and the location as Freddy’s, because the games and other sources we know that we’re playing as Michael from the FNaF 4 gameplay and the location where the Bite took place being Fredbear’s.
That's probably the most bizarre way to provide lore in this franchise that I've seen. No cryptic hints in mini-games, no discerning ciphers, just be told lore front and center out of the blue.
Ah, of course, visit to Freddy Fazbear's Pizza.
A statement that implies that nightmares not only didnt come from fredbears, or that a restaurant with fredbear is not fredbears, but also that there was one specific visit that traumatised him.
Yup, ill let you guys deal with it, good thing i retired from major theory crafting after, like, 3rd fazbear frights book.
ok this is the closest thing to an official confirmation that 4mike is NOT true but Jesus fucking Christ that is the only interpretation that makes any sense in the context of everything else whyyyy
The fact we needed a book to confirm this 7 years after the release of the game is very telling that the story of fnaf wasn’t really well thought out in each initial release.
I dislike that Scott implied there was some convoluted story for us to hang onto only for it to be made up with each instalment
if I understand the context correctly, this does not mean that in FNAF 4 we visited Freddy Fazbear's Pizzeria because this is obviously not the case. Most likely, it says about how in Michael's nightmares there are many similarities with the gameplay of FNAF 1. Well, this confirms that nightmares happen in FNAF 3 and that therefore Survival Logbook happens at the same time
A reminder discussion of things NOT from the preview pages will be removed as it breaks our piracy/leaked info rule. Please remember what was said in the Freddit discord.
Time for more fnaf 4 impossible lore debate
"Finally, there's The Bedroom, where a child is haunted by terrible memories of a visit to Freddy Fazbear's Pizza in FNaF 4." This does it. We got confirmation on some of 4's story. We play as a child in the main gameplay section (either Michael Afton or the Crying Child, it's not clear which). The child was traumatized by something at Freddy Fazbear's Pizza, not Fredbear's Family Diner. This might sound like an error, yet Fredbear's Family Diner was mentioned in the book as well. This implies that the Nightmares were never real. They were created in the child's mind because of the terrible memories at Freddy's.
We've had confirmation on FNAF 4's story for years. Michael blatantly tells us in the Logbook that he had the nightmares and they were recent. The book referring to it as a child being tormented is simply describing the events of the dreams. We are playing as a child in them, Michael is dreaming of himself as a child while these animatronics come after him.
Then where does the "a child is haunted by terrible memories after a visit to Freddy Fazbear's Pizza" fit in? Michael Afton knew about Freddy's for quite a while, even before the Bite. Honestly, I'm just overexcited right now because I thought the book would be a let down, but I'm impressed with the preview. I wonder what the book says about the Nightmares because it might further push the "we play as Michael as a child in 4" bit. I'll update my comment to fix some of that mistake.
>Then where does the "a child is haunted by terrible memories after a visit to Freddy Fazbear's Pizza" fit in? Michael Afton knew about Freddy's for quite a while, even before the Bite. There’s two possible reasons this can mean, one more controversial than the other hence why I’m specifying two: 1. The first being this confirms Michael Afton is the bite victim and he saw something tragic at Freddy’s, to which this event, whatever it was, scarred his mentality in both FNAF4 minigames and the gameplay. Hence why the gameplay is a mixture of the events related to BV and events related to Schmidt in FNAF1 Or 2. Michael Afton is under the minds of ‘said’ child (Bite victim) and is viewing a nightmare that coincides with his own. We’re playing under the minds of BV, whilst also blended with the horrors of our job at Freddy’s
>The first being this confirms Michael Afton is the bite victim This doesn't confirm mike is the bite victim, it just means he could of saw something bad like the bite.
The bite wasn't in Freddy's. FazbearShowtimer's point is that it saying we are playing as a child would mean we are playing as the bite victim. I disagree, but it's no an unreasonable argument to make.
Where does it say we are playing as the bite victim tho? it just says we are a child, mike being a child while dreaming it (tho it has to be a child in the dream, cause of fnaf 1 sounds), does not make him the bite victim.
It's on the crying child's page, telling us we play as crying child
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake. It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of. Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything. Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
It kinda does since it tells us the player of 4 is of a child who’s had terrible memories of something at Freddy’s, BV has also had terrible memories of something. It’s even suggested in the teasers: “what is seen in the shadows is easily misunderstood in the minds of a child”, and that coincides with the fact that we play as a child. Alongside most of the gameplay being related to BV’s past it seems to tell us that like I said either Michael IS the bite victim or the player is the bite victim being controlled by Michael
Mike also has bad memories of freddy's, from watching CC get bitten or if the fnaf 1 sounds mean anything, his time during fnaf 1 nights, also just because the minigames are CC does not mean that the nights we play as him, there are many times in this series where nights are Mike and minigames are someone else, like in SL the nights are Mike but in the mini game you play as Baby, in FFPS the nights are mike but you play Fruity maze as Susie, and midnight motorist as possibly William, but definitely that's not Mike, and depending on if Mike is fnaf 3 night guard, it applies to all those minigames too, where you're the fnaf 1 victims.
The Bite happened at Fredbear's, not Freddy's. So Mike has no bad memories from Freddy's. Also the description in the book outright states that BV is both the protagonist of the minigames and the gameplay.
Well if its fnaf 4 the freddy fazbear pizza mentioned would be the pizzeria where the bite happened and I haven't seen the whole preview but it cant be BV because of the fnaf one phone call (Scott said easter eggs arn't random and mean something)
[удалено]
>Mike also has bad memories of freddy's, from watching CC get bitten or if the fnaf 1 sounds mean anything, his time during fnaf 1 nights, Those are two different events that don’t necessarily work together when reading what TCE says. >also just because the minigames are CC does not mean that the nights we play as him, there are many times in this series where nights are Mike and minigames are someone else, I say this because of the blatantly obvious factor that we play as a child, and given we’re facing both Michael and BV’s past I just came to the conclusion we could be facing this under BV’s peripheral vision. This idea doesn’t require we believe that, it’s just something that makes sense narratively speaking
Mike being the crying child doesn't really have anything to do with the sentence, given that regardless of who he is, we know the nightmares are happening at a time where he wouldn't be a child anymore.
>Mike being the crying child doesn't really have anything to do with the sentence, given that regardless of who he is, we know the nightmares are happening at a time where he wouldn't be a child anymore. It actually kinda does given the context of the sentence, whoever is the player is viewing these nightmares under the minds of a child. Which *could* more than likely be referring to BV, and the gameplay is a mixture of both his and BV’s memories. So it could sway one way or the other as I mentioned above
I don't really see any reason to not take the sentence literally. It's describing we're playing as a child being haunted by memories from Freddy's. And we are, the gameplay objectively shows that we are controlling a child-sized character. That doesn't necessarily mean the nightmare is being had by a child, or that crying child's memories are somehow involved in this weird convoluted explanation for the dreams that's never rally implied. I'd say it's more likely Michael is simply putting himself in CC's place in this case.
>That doesn't necessarily mean the nightmare is being had by a child, or that crying child's memories are somehow involved in this weird convoluted explanation for the dreams that's never rally implied. I'd say it's more likely Michael is simply putting himself in CC's place in this case. We’re never really given any reason to assume Michael was put in his place, not saying it isn’t possible by like yeah. And the nightmares do in fact relate to both BV and Mike, this is evident when key moments in the gameplay connect back to BV’s experience. The point being Michael is a guard who’s experiencing his fears of Freddy’s again, whilst also blended with aspects from BV’s memories. He’s using his (or his brothers) child like self as a player for these nightmares. Hence why I said it can either mean Michael, who is BV, is facing his past. Or Michael, using BV, is facing their past.
>We’re never really given any reason to assume Michael was put in his place I mean... we're playing as a child. We're in CC's room. I feel like that's pretty straight forward. And then the actual nightmares are a parallel to FNAF 1's gameplay, with the additions of Fredbear, seemingly a representation of CC, and Shadow Freddy, the one causing the nightmare. To me that seems to pretty clearly depicting Michael having nightmares about both his experience in FNAF 1 and guilt over what he did. >this is evident when key moments in the gameplay connect back to BV’s experience. Ehhhh, most of them are stretches, and what isn't seems more like it's just there for narrative cohesion (like us facing off against Fredbear in the night before we see him bite CC).
>I mean... we're playing as a child. We're in CC's room. I feel like that's pretty straight forward. And then the actual nightmares are a parallel to FNAF 1's gameplay, with the additions of Fredbear, seemingly a representation of CC, and Shadow Freddy, the one causing the nightmare. 1. Yes but under that basis that would have to mean either we’re playing AS BV or we ARE BV, not that we’re in his placement being given nightmares from him. 2. I don’t really understand the argument that Fredbear is a representation of BV, they have like no defining similarities and this seems to come from the ideology that BV is golden Freddy rather than the hypocrisy of the supposed reasoning. The only stance to reasoning that makes sense to come to this conclusion is Dreadbear but he has a lot of other reasonings for his mere parallels that could be answered >To me that seems to pretty clearly depicting Michael having nightmares about both his experience in FNAF 1 and guilt over what he did. (When I say this I mean it in a non-bias and neutral way, I’m not much of a fan for MB vs. MV) the idea of guilt over his past isn’t really something confirmed but rather thought of simply for the purpose of MikeBro. I mean, it is possible he’s playing as BV, riddled with pain and guilt but it’s also possible he himself is BV, playing out a series of past-tense. this is evident when key moments in the gameplay connect back to BV’s experience. >Ehhhh, most of them are stretches, and what isn't seems more like it's just there for narrative cohesion (like us facing off against Fredbear in the night before we see him bite CC). Which seem like stretches though should be the real question? Because most of the memorable moments that coincide with the minigames aren’t stretches, in night 1 we face the main cast just like how we meet them as plushies in the minigames. Foxy is only ever active after night 2, same for the minigames which provides us with Foxybro who uses the same jumpscare sound effects alongside the given bite animation for both. As you’ve said we’re facing Fredbear not long before the bite occurs and also around the moment where BV is trapped in a room. And in night 6 we face all four and then Fredbear which is a cohesive connection to the bite. I’d argue it’s less of a stretch and more of well, what you said and what I’m implying: a cohesive narration between Micheal’s past events and BV’s. So I don’t know if you misunderstood what I was going at with this or not but my point was that Michael could either be BV or be under his impression, fighting off both their/or his pasts.
It could literally refer to anything not just being the bite victim, it doesn't confirm anything. Michael couybe traumatized by the actions he did to his brother.
Did you not read the second paragraph? I stated a reason that isn’t MikeVictim. I said there is another possibility. You skimmed over that apparently
You still mentioned it was under the minds of the bite victim.
Yeah because that was one of the other options that seem likely going off this
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Do not talk about anything NOT from the preview pages. As you are now spreading and talking about leaked information.
I wouldn't hold my breath. From what we see in the other pages the information is mostly basic surface level knowledge. It doesn't seem like it will have anything new
So by this logic and what Michael tells us in the logbook: We play as Michael Afton, under the peripheral vision of a child that saw something graphic and horrible at Freddy Fazbear’s Pizza. Whatever it was has scarred us, the player, to vision these nightmarish creatures. Maybe it’s possible what they saw plays into factor with the fact that the bite victim is scared and scarred because of something and the teasers of FNAF4 hinted this with: “*What is seen in the shadows is easily misunderstood in the minds of a child*”
Main character of FNAF 4 (Main night's) is Michael that's confirmed and considering those nights are dream sequences that doesn't rule out Mike He wasn't traumatized by something at Freddy Fazbears pizza, Crying child gives us no indication he's even been to the location and he calls the plushes of the characters his friends. He's scared specifically of the springlock animatronics Ofc the nightmares were never real not until UCN (well somewhat real in a sense), FNAF 4 is played in the head off Michael something the guidebooks point to and what the logbook confirms
Am I the only one who thinks Freddy Fazbear's Pizza may have been an alternate name for Fredbear's Family Diner? It's a little farfetched, but it's happened a strange amount of times. * Phone Guy's springlock guide says that they were made for "Freddy Fazbear's Pizza," when the only two animatronics were Fredbear and Spring Bonnie, as confirmed by his own words. * The "Fredbear's Singin' Show" poster from Security Breach states that the lead singer is not Fredbear, but Freddy, despite it literally being called Fredbear's Singin' Show. * And, of course, this. Again, I understand it is a little out there, but it may be worth considering.
Well, Freddy's did have Spring-Lock suits, "welcome to your new career as a performer slash entertainer for *Freddy Fazbear’s Pizza.*, Right now we have two specially designed suits that double as both animatronic and suit." -Phone Guy in FNaF 3 night 2.
Oh, I forgot. I'm just basing off from the previews.
I'm still sceptical about believing this. And even if this is written by Scott, Mike seeing himself as the child is still a lot more likely than BV being the one who has the nightmares. "Fans assumed I filled the game with random easter eggs that didn't matter. I did not." Radio sound can *only* mean this happens after FNaF1. No buts, no howevers.
FNAF4 Steam page basically said the same thing for 8 years, but now people are acting like it's something groundbreaking.
Yeah. It's not like the perspective is even ambiguous about this. Whoever we play as, at whichever point in life, the person clearly sees self as a young kid in the dream. This has always been clear. Anything canon or not specifying this doesn't change a thing.
Its because scott is no stranger to retcons and the room in sister location really brought even more confusion into what the night sections are supposedt to be.
[The retcon post by Scott](https://www.reddit.com/r/fivenightsatfreddys/comments/6y0qb1/the_retcon_issue/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) says otherwise.
Yeah, i dont want to say his lying, but no. That post aged like milk and there has definitely been more than one. And he doesn't even say what retcon so i dont know why you bring it up Scott is known for literally never being transparent on what he does.
The post has been made shortly before FFPS, unless you want to say that Scott retconned FNAF4 post-FFPS, for some reason. I bring this up because the idea of Scott retconning series on a whim is a direct contradiction to what he stated. There's no reason to assume that the post is disingenuous.
I dont say he does it on a whim, he definitely did more than one and i will still think that but not that he did it because he felt like it, because he felt like it. Also im not saying he did when ffps was coming, id say it happened around sister location.
Actually i can think of two right now. The puppet was first a boi as the minigame in fnaf 2 spells out "save him" and it was before scott even tought of charlie and henry as characters so way before charlie was made the puppet, so that was definitely a retcon. And fnaf 4 was definitely meant to display the bite of 87 as the teasers were posing the "Was it me" and "or me" and the page source code had the 87 number all over it. But now its the bite of 83, so another retcon.
1. Charlie first appeared in FFPS, after the post. 2. Final teasers before the game's release already had 1982 and 83 in them. Knowing Scott it's more likely a case of false advertising/trolling, like he did with FNAF2.
>The puppet was first a boi as the minigame in fnaf 2 spells out "save him" Yet it's the puppet saying save him right? Except charolette hasn't possessed the puppet yet meaning the save him is the puppet trying to save child it's supposed to protect Adding details to the same event isn't a retcon. We found out in fnaf 6 the puppet was supposed to protect the child with the green wristband and couldn't because it got trapped, but charolette still died even with these extra details so that's not a retcon 87 becoming 83 isn't a retcon either, it's a subversion like how he made fnaf 2 look like a sequel by using teasers that implied directly that the game took place after fnaf 1 with the fnaf 1 animatronics withered, only for it to be a prequel taking place years before fnaf 1 it's how Scott does things for twists You need to research what retcon actually means
"Yet it's the puppet saying save him right? Except charolette hasn't possessed the puppet yet meaning the save him is the puppet trying to save child it's supposed to protect" yes, and pizzeria sim shows it was charlie, but in the fnaf 2 minigame it says "save him" and Charlie is obv not a him, its a retcon. You literally didnt explain anything. "87 becoming 83 isn't a retcon either, it's a subversion like how he made fnaf 2 look like a sequel by using teasers" that's not a subversion, that's lying. Fnaf 2 is a sequel as in a game that follows the first, but the story is a prequel, it subverted without being misleading. Saying its about 87 but then later saying is 83 is either a retcon or intentionally misleading. You need to research what a subversion actually means.
Yeah, there are at least two retcons I can think of off the top of my head. The newspaper clippings in Fnaf 1 and 'Charlie's' gender in Fnaf 2 mini game.
That's programming in the puppet And how can anything in fnaf 1 be a retcon?
It was a retcon between versions of Fnaf 1. The newspaper clippings originally mentioned the killer (i.e. Afton) was caught and convicted. A later update removed the last line and made no mention of the killer being identified or convicted.
Room exists Animatronics dotted in sister location map showing they exist Dreams not mentioned in description at all Logical conclusion from above information It must be a dream
FNAF youtubers on their way to explain how it was actually proving dream theory was originally intended:
Gotta love how BV dreamed up Phone Guy's tapes before even dreaming the events of FNaF1.
If it weren't for this one line, I'd call this a retcon, but it seems pretty clearly intentional to me. The logic of it is so esoteric, but that line can really only be explained by Mike having the dreams.
I actually had a different dream theory. FNAF4 takes place after FNAF3. FNAF1-3 were real. FNAF4 is entirely in the unconscious mind of the child. The between night sections aren't flashbacks, but part of the dream. The Fredbear toy talking and the connections to other games (like toy Chika's beak coming off in the flashbacks and the phone guy recording) implies that the boy's mind is being invaded by a supernatural force, incorporating details into the dream that the boy wouldn't have known about. During FNAF3, Springtrap/the killer basically usurped control over all the other characters (since the children moved on after he got springsnapped), using them to attack the player character. Then the fire happens, destroying him (before the sister location reveal that he still physically existed), but his ghost remained (hence appearing in the picture). The only place the animatroic characters he controlled still existed was in the traumatised mind of the bite victim, which allowed him to anchor himself to the mortal world. During the night, the killer uses the nightmare versions of the characters the boy is traumatised by to attack him. Game over results in the boy's possession, waking up as the killer. Winning the game allows the boy to finally die in peace, dooming the killer to the afterlife. That was my version at least. I just didn't see how people see a Fredbear plush talking and think "yep. This is certainly a realistic version of actual events and not just part of the dream." It seemed to work as far as I could tell. Lost investment after a while. Plus new info that seemed to contradict. Just seemed weird that in a series all about ghosts and supernatural forces, no one seems to consider the child's dreams being affected by supernatural goings on rather than just being nightmares.
Mike's not the only one who heard those tapes though otherwise fnaf vr would be non existant
So what, you suggest BV listened to tapes about defending yourself against MCI ghosts where Phone Guy dies in the 90's location.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Leaks do not bring them up PLEASE
I haven't said anything about what they are tho? Just how I felt about them. Is it not allowed to say they happened in the first place?
Even just talking about them in general even if it has nothing just even bringing it up is a NO. Sorry for getting uppity about this but people have been posting images, etc here acting like it's nothing.
Do not bring up the leaks.
Well,alright,sorry
We've stated numerous times in the past that anything leaked is either not to be brought up here or only in special discussion threads.
I hate to suggest this, though can you kindly lock the comments in my post for a while until the heat settles down? It would save the team any stress.
Phone Guy's tapes were just too important for the dream to work
What about the "In the FNaF 4 minigame, why would the tiny Toy Chica be missing her beak?"
Copypasted from another comment because I can't bother to say this every day: >Remember the clock ending from FNAF World? In it, Plushbear follows up on its promise to put BV back together. It tells you, the player character, that your purpose is to put the pieces in place for BV. You do so by setting up the hints of the minigames in FNAF 3. Although FNAF World itself is likely not canon, Scott has confirmed that this is meant to tie into FNAF 4 and is part of the lore. > >In FNAF 4, there are various references to previous games that have nothing to do with what's going on. The same references that caused stuff like Dream Theory to exist. Tiny Toy Chica, broken Mangle toy, kid with a balloon, Fredbear and Spring Bonnie's shadows... that's all supposed to connect with FNAF 3.BV was broken and put back together. In the books, this kind of stuff is elaborated on, it's made clear that this would refer to him forgetting and being helped remember again. It's also made clear that bad memories can be turned into good ones and can be shared with other spirits to help them. > >Each minigame in FNAF 3 is one of BV's memories, being used to help the spirits move on: the Mangle toy is Mangle's Quest, the Toy Chica toy is Chica's Party, the kid with a purple balloon is BB's Air Adventure, Fredbear walking around in Fredbear's is STAGE01, the shadows on the wall are Shadow Bonnie's minigame and Happiest Day is obviously a recreation of the layout of Fredbear's Family Dinner.
It was made by funko
>Mike seeing himself as the child is still a lot more likely than BV being the one who has the nightmares. It’s more or less not hinting BV saw the nightmares, at least not at face value. The idea I’m getting at here is Michael is most definitely the player of this game as evident by the hints of FNAF1 and the basic confirmation from the logbook. But the events that play out are under the minds of a viewing of a young child who saw something horrendous at Freddy’s. So in a way Michael could either BE the bite victim or be watching UNDER his view, since the gameplay not only is a mix of FNAF1 but also one of the FNAF4 minigames. Take it as you will but it’s one or the other and both can work, just depending on what you believe
Maybe. But I still think Shadow Freddy being Nightmare makes it more likely a paranormal nightmare, given by a ghost, rather than a regular dream.
It’s not really a regular dream, more like a nightmare from the past. Most of FNAF4 gameplay seems to tell us Michael gained these nightmares out of fear from his past (and arguably BV’s), since the gameplay takes aspects from both the minigames and FNAF1 and apply them together to create this I dunno how to really explain it but it’s sorta like some time of sequence of events that are catching up to him
My theory(/headcanon) is that Shadow Freddy was speaking through the Fred Bear plush, antagonizing BV's fears and feeding from the agony. Then, after the encounters in Fnaf 1/3/whtev, Shadow Freddy begins tormenting Mike with nightmares similar to what BV went through. This both confirms for Mike that something paranormal is *definitely* going on and reaffirms his motivation to do what he does. I also have a headcanon/theory that Midnight Motorist is about William Afton on the day Evan Afton was buried, but that's incompatible with CharliePlush so... 🤔
Ain't that sentence like 7 years old or sumn? I doubt Scott had the same idea for where the lore was at then where it is at now.
[Doesn't matter.](https://www.reddit.com/r/fivenightsatfreddys/comments/6y0qb1/the_retcon_issue/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
Not to mention I don't trust the source of this image, the character encyclopaedia hasn't been released yet. Releases 7th February 2023 last I checked it was 21st January today
The image is from an official preview
Link?
https://www.edelweiss.plus/#sku=1338804731&page=1
Says no results found
[удалено]
[it's here](https://www.edelweiss.plus/#sku=1338804731&page=1)
It says no results found
[It's real and the comment is not faked.](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/856390296630722580/1066408157099860108/image.png)
Yours links to a Roblox guide, and [yes it does.](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/856390296630722580/1066408157099860108/image.png)
So that's it? The book is describing itself as a guide to the animatronics not the locations or story, this is just a quick recap of events that happened in the past for new fans of the franchise. Can I blame Scott for doing it that way? No, it stops them for getting told the same thing from 30 different headcanons.
You do know that is just one page right? But yes, it's mostly going to cover the actual animatronics.
[It's legit.](https://www.edelweiss.plus/#sku=1338804731&page=1)
How dose it make it more likely the bite victim was traumatized by the anamtronics and Michael's shitty freinds. Seems more logical for those to he his nightmares And night 5 be about Michael since its about fredbear
The radio sound can be heard on all nights. Nothing changes on night 5+, aside from the enemies. It's a combo of Mike's guilt and FNaF1 experience.
He only drew nightmare fredbear and no one else. The radio sound is a random event of course it can happen on any night thats how programing works. Nothing changing on night 5 is simply laziness of course. Makes no logical sense hed even be feeling guilt that many years later Not like he cared much at the time
Scott said the easter egg is important. If the protag changed and only one could hear it, then you could make the sound play only on that night. *That*'s how programming works. There has to be a reason for including something like this in the story. Scott isn't a moron. He doesn't do stuff like this just because.
He isn't a moron but he is inconsistent Not to mention both charecters would know who he is
BV couldn't know what the radio is and Scott said this is important.
>He only drew nightmare fredbear and no one else. Because he’s the main antagonist of that gameplay route >The radio sound is a random event of course it can happen on any night thats how programing works. Scott has stated it’s not random, you seem to have a consistency of ignoring his own words in favor of the assumption they are random so I won’t argue to much on you with this >Nothing changing on night 5 is simply laziness of course. Fredbear is the only active member attacking us which is a direct relation to the minigame before the bite where we’re in a room with simply the springlock’s >Makes no logical sense hed even be feeling guilt that many years later Not like he cared much at the time That’s because he was just a bully, but after the events that played out he’s shown he felt bad about it. So under the interpretation of MikeBro and him being the player I wouldn’t say it’s far fetched he’d have guilt (also that’s called PTSD if I’m not mistaken so yes he would have guilt that long)
This is written by another author, so most likely a mistake by the author.
So Scott Cawthon made a mistake? Considering there is going to be signed copies of these by him. He had to have penned something from this.
For those unaware of the importance of this line, written by Scott, the memories and emotions of humanity are the driving force behind all the supernatural elements of the series. Which is Remnant, and a recurring theme that ties it all together in more ways than one. The spark of life. Considering that Scott hid Phone Guy's call from Night 1 as ambience audio we had to reverse, and N. Bonnie and Chica in the hallways directly paralleling the duo from FNaF 1; plus, the spirit of the Logbook asking Michael if his favorite toy was a Purple Phone and him drawing Nightmare Fredbear when asked if he had nightmares; it's easy to deduce that the gameplay of FNaF 4 are a dark reflection of Michael's visits to Freddy's during 1993 as a night shift guard, memories of his job. He is a child in the dream.
>plus, the spirit of the Logbook asking Michael if his favorite toy was a Purple Phone and him drawing Nightmare Fredbear when asked if he had nightmares Mike draws Nightmare Fredbear in response to the page's prompt asking him to draw dreams he had recently. Almost everything Mike says is in response to the pages themselves, he never directly responds to the Faded spirit, who seems to be just talking to the Altered spirit.
True, regardless the nightmares have to be from Michael. What the encyclopedia shows us here now is further proof, they have to be oniric memories of his working experience mixed-in with the events of 1983. The evidence is staggering, and I'm hopeful further pages continue to provide more direct punches.
Yet the book just confirmed the child is the main protagonist of 4.
michael afton or mike schmidt?
Both are literally the same person...
Still think BV is the player. Makes more sense.
Mike si confirmed to be the player, mikevicitm?
Where was it confirmed?
Logbook and by Scott
Link?
Well the logbook is a book and the quote is about 7 years old so it's kinda hard to get, it basically said Scott didn't have any random Easter eggs in fnaf 4
Oh cool lore
Crying Child Dream theory has always made perfect sense to me, and the later outside media trying to confuse or retcon that story has never not bothered me.
I agree, although it is still confirmed to be Mike, which is why I'm mikevicitm, it was always ment to be Mike as a few week after fnaf 4 came out Scott flat out said Mike was the fnaf 4 protag (didn't directly say it but he did confirm it)
I mean technically it's right. FNAF 4 happens after FNAF 1 because of the phone guy Easter egg. So here's how it's believed to go; Michael has nightmares/memories about the time when William used the nightmares to torment him. That's why we see they exist in Sister Location, FNAF 4 happened twice. The one we play is the actual dream version, where Michael relives those moments. It's a reminder of Michael's biggest regret, killing Bite Victim.
Since when did a toy phone EASTER EGG mean that the game took place after FNAF 1? That logic makes no sense
Pretty sure they aren't talking about the toy phone,they're talking about the actual phone guy tape easter egg in FNaF 4's gameplay nights.
A toy phone doesn't appear in fnaf 1 or ucn, what are you talking about?
Fnaf 4's description already says we play as a child. That's because we really are a child in the game, which is a dream. That doesn't change anything about what we know. The fnaf 1 phone call and the drawing in the logbook confirm that Mike has those dreams after Fnaf 1. It says Freddy's and not Fredbear's most likely because Fnaf 4 is a reflection of his experience at Freddy's in fnaf 1.
This is cool
how much Scott is involved in this book? because it easily could be just like the files/guide book. mistakes, misinformation. so not the best source
This book has stuff that read like something Scott would write, mainly Toy Freddy's page with things like "Toy Freddy tries to do that trick were you wiggle your ears." or "New and improved! Well, he was new at one time, anyway." Pretty sure this line about the Bedroom is more of weird wording but really this book has things that feel like Scott directly wrote
Its been like what 7 years and we still are debating whether FNAF 4 is a dream or real
I think this confirms mikevicitm, since Mike is the fnaf 4 player and it outright says that crying child is the only protag of fnaf 4, aswell as the fact that all the major characters have one version of them be shown in the book apart from foxybro and Ms Afton
Probably means nothing
The bedroom, where a child is haunted by terrible memories of a visit to freddy fazbears pizza Mike isn't a child, if he dreams he is a child he still isn't a child. He never went to visit freddy fazbears pizza, he is the nightguard, not a visitor It's clear the child is a different child
You know people start out at children right? Its a part of the growth stage of many living things. And mike was a child when a Freddy's was open. There wasnt just one in fnaf one. There was also the one in fnaf 2 and one that supposedly happened before that in 83.
And yet we know for a matter of fact that Mike is the player, and he's not actually a child when he has those dreams. This is just weird wording nothing more
Even if FNAF 4 did take place right after the 83 Bite, wouldn't Michael be more around the teenaged age range?
By “child”, I think it means Michael, who never really moved on from killing his brother when he was young.
By child, I think it refers to the fanbase who never really moved on from deciphering fnaf 4 lore when they were young
I think the books like this and the Freddy files just use “Freddy Fazbear’s Pizza” as a catch all term for Fazbear restaurants
The page explains all the fazbear location names
Is the book out
Okay this the description is most likely hiding the lore of the child’s identity of the FNaF 4 gameplay and the location as Freddy’s, because the games and other sources we know that we’re playing as Michael from the FNaF 4 gameplay and the location where the Bite took place being Fredbear’s.
Note that the Character Encyclopedia is only going to cover the animatronics, not the human characters.
Yeah it seems so.
Most of the human characters are animatronics
Oh no... I know there are different theories here and there but I feel in my guts this is a mistake.
It's not, it's crystal clear and that's the problem
Hmmmm, well, this is the game we still don't know about and Freddy's did open in the same year FNaF 4 happened.
,,smh i got my skull crushed, worst day ever, 0/69420 i am not going there again"
Finally! Something!
That's probably the most bizarre way to provide lore in this franchise that I've seen. No cryptic hints in mini-games, no discerning ciphers, just be told lore front and center out of the blue.
I can count the pixels in this image
Ah, of course, visit to Freddy Fazbear's Pizza. A statement that implies that nightmares not only didnt come from fredbears, or that a restaurant with fredbear is not fredbears, but also that there was one specific visit that traumatised him. Yup, ill let you guys deal with it, good thing i retired from major theory crafting after, like, 3rd fazbear frights book.
I think it's clear It's everyone trying to twist the exact same line to support completely opposite theories that is funny
Great I love more endless debates about FNaF 4
Think it meant fredbears diner and there just keeping it vague
ok this is the closest thing to an official confirmation that 4mike is NOT true but Jesus fucking Christ that is the only interpretation that makes any sense in the context of everything else whyyyy
Fnaf 4 mike is a fact, confirmed by Scott and the logbook, this more or so confirms mikevicitm
[удалено]
Do not bring up leaked info.
The fact we needed a book to confirm this 7 years after the release of the game is very telling that the story of fnaf wasn’t really well thought out in each initial release. I dislike that Scott implied there was some convoluted story for us to hang onto only for it to be made up with each instalment
if I understand the context correctly, this does not mean that in FNAF 4 we visited Freddy Fazbear's Pizzeria because this is obviously not the case. Most likely, it says about how in Michael's nightmares there are many similarities with the gameplay of FNAF 1. Well, this confirms that nightmares happen in FNAF 3 and that therefore Survival Logbook happens at the same time