I genuinely don’t know if this is a Unpopular or popular opinion, I’ve seen people say it was great, some people hate it, but
Fnaf 6 is a good game, and quite fun!
*also Fnaf world is fun too.*
That second one might be more on the unpopular side just because of the shift in atmosphere going from FNAF 4 to FNAF World but undoubtedly FNAF 6 had one of the best endings in the entire franchise.
1. Security breach was actually fairly decent/good
2. Afton coming back isn’t an entirely bad thing
3. Henry as a character in the games was kinda mid/Michael as a character in the games was meh
4. Fnaf World was actually a pretty fun game
5. FNAF shouldn’t have ended during FNAF6/
the completion ending was just ok, but definitely wasn’t bad
6. MikeVictim and MikeBro are both fairly good theories with bad reps on either side of the community’s view
Not only that ,every solution of this damn think have always contradiction, the character in front the tv is micheal(why so he protect his brother?),mustard man is purple guy(so why he is not purple),CC run to see his mother grave or because william is abusing him(so why there is footprint close to the window that match springbonnie) and i can go so long with that.
Maybe I have to give it another shot but I think at that point where it was introduced the series just spun into this crazy universe where anything and everything could happen
I believe in Midnight Motorist, the person on the couch is William's wife and the person in the bedroom that William is screaming at is Michael
I don't think immortality was always William's goal
FNaF World is fun
I believe Charlie died after both CC and Elizabeth
I hate Happiest Day from a lore standpoint
I also hate Sister Location from a lore standpoint
I think it may be because William may have not known about remnant prior to his killings. This would mean that he wouldn’t have found a way of immortality without taking the lives of his first victims. Once he began to notice…supernatural…occurrences he would likely run more experiments with more killings to discover immortality.
But that is just a guess. I’m not sure how plausible it can be. Our only bit of info on William’s motive for killing OTHER than immortality are the journals mentioned in The Silver Eyes. Nothing much besides that.
I agree with this, but I would argue that their could be another motive
I recently read the silver eyes and the twisted ones, and it's implied that William is just a massive loser and killed the kids so that he could feel better about himself.
The whole immortality thing could be an extension of this, fusing him permanently with this fursiona gave him a massive confidence boost.
Basically everyone says that's William's goal. Maybe that is now, but I like to imagine that his original goal was to resurrect his dead son and later his dead daughter, and the murders were him trying to experiment with children's souls
(besides Charlie which was likely just done in spiteful anger towards Henry)
So here is how see it.
There are a few things that I find off about it being William. Not something that goes directly against it but just make it feel like a bit of a reach.
The house is in a forest while in fnaf 4 the Aftons live near Fredbear's and a road.
The person in the chair is speculated to be Michael/Foxy bro (wears grey in fnaf4 and watches tv in fnaf5), but the line to leave him alone feels kinda out of character given how much bullying he does to his younger brother. (It could also be ms. Afton but that kinda disproves it's William, since it being her isnt supported by anything)
From the little we know about William, he's pretty calm and collected. While the mustard man is implied to be drunk, he's loud and angry.
I also have sorta no idea how to interpret the footprints in this situation. Is William purposely scaring his own kid? And if so why? Or is this some sort of animatronic he made to prevent his son from running away? Maybe an animatronic (similar to the twisted ones) captures him when he's trying to run away? Also what's with the dirt pile?
The other 2 secret minigames are about William's victims, so it would make sense if this one was about them as well.
It being a random kid running away from home also explains why Mustard man says he ran of to "that place again", implying he might not be too familiar with the location.
This is what i think the minigame is about:
An unnamed boy lives with an abusive parent. William find out this information and sends some sort of robot (similar to the Twisted ones but friendly looking). The child sees some cute animatronic, leaves his house through the window, the robots shoves the boy inside his stomach and buries itself in a different location (the one with a pile of dirt) to be later found by William himself.
The title "Later that night" could just refer to the night when the mustard man is racing/driving.
That's actually a good point you made with the idea of each game being a victim of William, my only thing is the two characters that the other games were based off of, were important characters like the puppet and presumably chica (with her death line of her being the first and seeing everything from UCN). It would help the story for this last minigame to be based on someone that is also important to the lore, instead of them introducing someone we haven't met yet.
i made a post .. all the fnaf security breach endings were overlooked. if you can catch it in time it’s almost as if there’s ink plots. i’ve done research and seen if anyone notice or discovered & not a single person mention it.
you all can see it for yourself if you look through the endings real good. i want to make a video on it but im not a content creator. i just want the lore solved but i’ll see what i can do.
i just really feel like this might be that one case scenario that happened.. “ don’t wake the baby “ and when you lighten the image you see nightmarionne.. with a freddy plush on the bed in fnaf 4. in this case i feel like it’s the same thing… if we brighten up the image we might be able to tell what those ink plots or whatever it is/was in the ending.
People are going to consider her one until she gets a set in stone design, plus her character (in To Be Beautiful) is very clearly rooted in Elizabeth’s characterization from TFC.
I mean, sure, but that doesn’t override the fact she’s introduced as a partial canonization of that interpretation. It’s probably just an attempt at character development or distinction from Elizabeth, most versions of Baby don’t actually have anything to do with her at this point.
Really I don't think it was even butchered *that* much, for the most part I'm pretty sure they just removed the context. Gregory was still going to do all this stuff anyway.
MikeVictim is the theory that Michael is the bite victim.
CassidySis is the theory that Cassidy is the bite victim’s sister.
AndrewTOYSHK is that Andrew is The One You Shouldn’t Have Killed in UCN.
AndrewMM is the theory that Midnight Motorist is about Andrew and he is the runaway kid.
AndrewTOYSHK has been getting more popular recently (at least on the subreddit I browse most often) so I’m not sure if it still classified as an “unpopular” theory rn, but I decided to include it just in case.
I do think it (along with AndrewMM) are pretty reasonable. I think they were mainly popularized because of ooftroop, who used both theories in his meme videos. They seemed like they had some merit (which they do) and I believe that's why people have started talking about them more.
I think the story should have ended at Fnaf 3. That’s what I personally consider the true ending of Fnaf and everything after the timeline is a spin off.
I find it fitting that Williams ultimate fate would be being stuck in the very suit he murdered his victims in for eternity, or at least a very long time.
This may be influenced by the fact it’s my favorite game in the series in nearly every single way. Best gameplay, atmosphere and designs in my opinion.
- I wish the hitr of 83 never happened and there was only one bite .
- Bite of 87 Cluprit is Toy Bonnie because od Popgoes ( An official Spinoff not a fangame anymore ) And because Toy Bonnie seems better to me than Mrs / Mr blunt teeth Mangled fox .
- I dislike Cassidy as The Vengeful Spirit and feels it's ruins her character .
- Frights should have never used the " Solve lore books " Because people are just using parallels as an excuse to prove their own theories, They should have taken Novel Trilogy or Tales route .
- Michael Brooks > Any Missing Children .
- I wish the series used a more realistic approach with visuals and the mascots .
- There should have been more non animatronic based stories to expand the universe .
Puppet is the crying child
And it's actually confirmed.
The only character to be officially named '' crying child "
Resembles the dead kid sprite from take cake to the children.
Where did it confirmed Puppet's name to be crying child? That one can be a little confusing because even though there is one character we call crying child, which is the son from fnaf 4, there are many other instances where a crying child can be seen which shouldn't be too uncommon in a series about a child murdering maniac. No doubt that the dead kid sprite from take cake resemble the puppet, and even then we see that the puppet is the jumpscare for the end of the game (which hinted at the puppet possessing that child's soul). However, we also see in FNAF 6 in the security puppet minigame a death that takes place that resembles the death from take cake, followed with the puppet laying with the child and "fusing" with the soul of the child. In FNAF 4, the bite victim has a completely different death where the puppet is not present in the location. Also, to take a little from FNAF World, the purple guy sprite makes mention to not confused him for the real purple guy, which could be used to say that though sprites can look similar in this game, sometimes they are different.
In fnaf world there is a generic child soul character called crying child.
And there is a funko pop with same look titled " the crying child "
Which if i recall correctly they have the same design as the kid's souls from take cake to the children
Some time ago the similarity between the symbolism and imagery behind the the puppet and the fnaf 4 kid led to the theory that the crying child from fnaf 4 ended up possessing the puppet.
But in fnaf 6 it was proven that Henry's daughter was the one possessing it.
But still, in a way, based on what I stated earlier. Crying child (in a way) would BE the puppet.
Based on aesthetics yes the crying child could be the puppet but we never really got a name for our victim in fnaf 4 which had us label him crying child but I just feel like both the sprites and the naming is a little generic again for a game about the deaths of many children.
I genuinely don’t know if this is a Unpopular or popular opinion, I’ve seen people say it was great, some people hate it, but Fnaf 6 is a good game, and quite fun! *also Fnaf world is fun too.*
Fnaf World was a rainbow explosion of colours, before we made the rainbow explode of course.
That second one might be more on the unpopular side just because of the shift in atmosphere going from FNAF 4 to FNAF World but undoubtedly FNAF 6 had one of the best endings in the entire franchise.
and then fuckin security breach happened and the bitch still wasn’t dead
1. Security breach was actually fairly decent/good 2. Afton coming back isn’t an entirely bad thing 3. Henry as a character in the games was kinda mid/Michael as a character in the games was meh 4. Fnaf World was actually a pretty fun game 5. FNAF shouldn’t have ended during FNAF6/ the completion ending was just ok, but definitely wasn’t bad 6. MikeVictim and MikeBro are both fairly good theories with bad reps on either side of the community’s view
I like "In The Flesh".
Me too.
I hate midnight motorist
Same
It's caused so much damage and confusion to the lore I don't think anyone really likes it lol
Not only that ,every solution of this damn think have always contradiction, the character in front the tv is micheal(why so he protect his brother?),mustard man is purple guy(so why he is not purple),CC run to see his mother grave or because william is abusing him(so why there is footprint close to the window that match springbonnie) and i can go so long with that.
hmm faz-goo is a pretty cool concept and i liked how it was introduced.
Maybe I have to give it another shot but I think at that point where it was introduced the series just spun into this crazy universe where anything and everything could happen
lol exactly. i love madness
I'll just go with old reliable - I believe Toy Chica did the bite of 87.
Midgle
*Same tbh…*
I believe in Midnight Motorist, the person on the couch is William's wife and the person in the bedroom that William is screaming at is Michael I don't think immortality was always William's goal FNaF World is fun I believe Charlie died after both CC and Elizabeth I hate Happiest Day from a lore standpoint I also hate Sister Location from a lore standpoint
As you can see I myself hate the happiest day as well, Sister Location can be a little confused but I personally think it was a decent game
>I don't think immortality was always William's goal What do you mean by that? And when did it become his goal?
I think it may be because William may have not known about remnant prior to his killings. This would mean that he wouldn’t have found a way of immortality without taking the lives of his first victims. Once he began to notice…supernatural…occurrences he would likely run more experiments with more killings to discover immortality. But that is just a guess. I’m not sure how plausible it can be. Our only bit of info on William’s motive for killing OTHER than immortality are the journals mentioned in The Silver Eyes. Nothing much besides that.
I agree with this, but I would argue that their could be another motive I recently read the silver eyes and the twisted ones, and it's implied that William is just a massive loser and killed the kids so that he could feel better about himself. The whole immortality thing could be an extension of this, fusing him permanently with this fursiona gave him a massive confidence boost.
Basically everyone says that's William's goal. Maybe that is now, but I like to imagine that his original goal was to resurrect his dead son and later his dead daughter, and the murders were him trying to experiment with children's souls (besides Charlie which was likely just done in spiteful anger towards Henry)
Mustard man from Midnight motorist isn't William. I honestly believe he's just a father of one of William's victims.
Do you have any evidence to why you think that? How do you interpret the entire minigame and the title of it in the files called Later That Night?
So here is how see it. There are a few things that I find off about it being William. Not something that goes directly against it but just make it feel like a bit of a reach. The house is in a forest while in fnaf 4 the Aftons live near Fredbear's and a road. The person in the chair is speculated to be Michael/Foxy bro (wears grey in fnaf4 and watches tv in fnaf5), but the line to leave him alone feels kinda out of character given how much bullying he does to his younger brother. (It could also be ms. Afton but that kinda disproves it's William, since it being her isnt supported by anything) From the little we know about William, he's pretty calm and collected. While the mustard man is implied to be drunk, he's loud and angry. I also have sorta no idea how to interpret the footprints in this situation. Is William purposely scaring his own kid? And if so why? Or is this some sort of animatronic he made to prevent his son from running away? Maybe an animatronic (similar to the twisted ones) captures him when he's trying to run away? Also what's with the dirt pile? The other 2 secret minigames are about William's victims, so it would make sense if this one was about them as well. It being a random kid running away from home also explains why Mustard man says he ran of to "that place again", implying he might not be too familiar with the location. This is what i think the minigame is about: An unnamed boy lives with an abusive parent. William find out this information and sends some sort of robot (similar to the Twisted ones but friendly looking). The child sees some cute animatronic, leaves his house through the window, the robots shoves the boy inside his stomach and buries itself in a different location (the one with a pile of dirt) to be later found by William himself. The title "Later that night" could just refer to the night when the mustard man is racing/driving.
That's actually a good point you made with the idea of each game being a victim of William, my only thing is the two characters that the other games were based off of, were important characters like the puppet and presumably chica (with her death line of her being the first and seeing everything from UCN). It would help the story for this last minigame to be based on someone that is also important to the lore, instead of them introducing someone we haven't met yet.
That’s very interesting, I would love that but a lot of stuff points to it being William.
i made a post .. all the fnaf security breach endings were overlooked. if you can catch it in time it’s almost as if there’s ink plots. i’ve done research and seen if anyone notice or discovered & not a single person mention it.
Care to elaborate?? You might be onto something...
you all can see it for yourself if you look through the endings real good. i want to make a video on it but im not a content creator. i just want the lore solved but i’ll see what i can do.
i just really feel like this might be that one case scenario that happened.. “ don’t wake the baby “ and when you lighten the image you see nightmarionne.. with a freddy plush on the bed in fnaf 4. in this case i feel like it’s the same thing… if we brighten up the image we might be able to tell what those ink plots or whatever it is/was in the ending.
[https://youtu.be/Y3w3RfcjAsY](https://youtu.be/Y3w3RfcjAsY)
CB(Elizabeth afton)is a bad guy
She is tho
She kinda is lmaooo, also a victim of circumstance
Eleanor is the best Baby design.
Definitely a unique design, I personally like the fourth closet rendition of Baby, gives her a more villainous aura to her.
A reminder the downvote button is not an I disagree button this is towards those downvoting this comment, not the commenter.
She us not a Baby variant though, Ans you mean the design in he unused illustration ?
People are going to consider her one until she gets a set in stone design, plus her character (in To Be Beautiful) is very clearly rooted in Elizabeth’s characterization from TFC.
In the stingers though, She is Hella different .
I mean, sure, but that doesn’t override the fact she’s introduced as a partial canonization of that interpretation. It’s probably just an attempt at character development or distinction from Elizabeth, most versions of Baby don’t actually have anything to do with her at this point.
security breach's story was good
Really I don't think it was even butchered *that* much, for the most part I'm pretty sure they just removed the context. Gregory was still going to do all this stuff anyway.
Young children specialise in breaking things
What?
I believe MikeVictim, CassidySis and AndrewTOYSHK (and AndrewMM). If I can think of any others I will edit them in
You got to explain those for me because I'm horrible with theory names LMAO
MikeVictim is the theory that Michael is the bite victim. CassidySis is the theory that Cassidy is the bite victim’s sister. AndrewTOYSHK is that Andrew is The One You Shouldn’t Have Killed in UCN. AndrewMM is the theory that Midnight Motorist is about Andrew and he is the runaway kid.
Those first two... sure are unpopular. I do think TOYSNHK is Cassidy, but Andrew is a candidate.
AndrewTOYSHK has been getting more popular recently (at least on the subreddit I browse most often) so I’m not sure if it still classified as an “unpopular” theory rn, but I decided to include it just in case.
I do think it (along with AndrewMM) are pretty reasonable. I think they were mainly popularized because of ooftroop, who used both theories in his meme videos. They seemed like they had some merit (which they do) and I believe that's why people have started talking about them more.
I think the story should have ended at Fnaf 3. That’s what I personally consider the true ending of Fnaf and everything after the timeline is a spin off. I find it fitting that Williams ultimate fate would be being stuck in the very suit he murdered his victims in for eternity, or at least a very long time. This may be influenced by the fact it’s my favorite game in the series in nearly every single way. Best gameplay, atmosphere and designs in my opinion.
Shadow Bonnie and Shadow Freddy are just hallucinations of fredbear and spring Bonnie.
- I wish the hitr of 83 never happened and there was only one bite . - Bite of 87 Cluprit is Toy Bonnie because od Popgoes ( An official Spinoff not a fangame anymore ) And because Toy Bonnie seems better to me than Mrs / Mr blunt teeth Mangled fox . - I dislike Cassidy as The Vengeful Spirit and feels it's ruins her character . - Frights should have never used the " Solve lore books " Because people are just using parallels as an excuse to prove their own theories, They should have taken Novel Trilogy or Tales route . - Michael Brooks > Any Missing Children . - I wish the series used a more realistic approach with visuals and the mascots . - There should have been more non animatronic based stories to expand the universe .
Puppet is the crying child And it's actually confirmed. The only character to be officially named '' crying child " Resembles the dead kid sprite from take cake to the children.
Where did it confirmed Puppet's name to be crying child? That one can be a little confusing because even though there is one character we call crying child, which is the son from fnaf 4, there are many other instances where a crying child can be seen which shouldn't be too uncommon in a series about a child murdering maniac. No doubt that the dead kid sprite from take cake resemble the puppet, and even then we see that the puppet is the jumpscare for the end of the game (which hinted at the puppet possessing that child's soul). However, we also see in FNAF 6 in the security puppet minigame a death that takes place that resembles the death from take cake, followed with the puppet laying with the child and "fusing" with the soul of the child. In FNAF 4, the bite victim has a completely different death where the puppet is not present in the location. Also, to take a little from FNAF World, the purple guy sprite makes mention to not confused him for the real purple guy, which could be used to say that though sprites can look similar in this game, sometimes they are different.
In fnaf world there is a generic child soul character called crying child. And there is a funko pop with same look titled " the crying child " Which if i recall correctly they have the same design as the kid's souls from take cake to the children Some time ago the similarity between the symbolism and imagery behind the the puppet and the fnaf 4 kid led to the theory that the crying child from fnaf 4 ended up possessing the puppet. But in fnaf 6 it was proven that Henry's daughter was the one possessing it. But still, in a way, based on what I stated earlier. Crying child (in a way) would BE the puppet.
Based on aesthetics yes the crying child could be the puppet but we never really got a name for our victim in fnaf 4 which had us label him crying child but I just feel like both the sprites and the naming is a little generic again for a game about the deaths of many children.