All posts by MonoManic Guy

<p>Sure it was! And i dont think he is done with it yet, something tells me that some of the voices.com job requests that Scott is currently posting aren't for Security Breach </p>

I thought Security Puppet being a Funtime was a fact already

<p>Well, i was still defending MikeVictim until i saw this </p> <div class="floatright">File:103083410 264599048113270 575268847776090434 n.jpg</div> <p>So now i guess i will have to believe this since Scott confirmed it... </p><p>
</p><p>
</p><p>
</p><p>
</p><p>
</p><p>
...please note that im joking, Scott wasnt being serious in that post </p>

<p>Dude... </p><p>
</p><p>
</p><p>
</p><p>
</p><p>
</p><p>...can you explain me how the heck you see they both similar? </p>

<p>They are NOT the same, they just have the same name, Mangle was most likely based on the SL Funtime Foxy, and maybe they even extracted Funtime Foxy's voice box to build Mangle, because that would explain why Funtime Foxy has no voice </p>

Thanks

Seriously? Could you pass the link then? I'm compilating Mikevictim evidence for a video

<p>Well, i don't see it really happening like that, and i probably will keep believing on mikevictim, but i respect your theory and also i admire your research. </p>

<p>Well, in that case, if we are continuing the post, i think i should rewrite my comment about the proofs on this theory and adding some bonus research things [Spoilers ahead] </p><p>1-In the freddy files i think theres a page on the SL section, which shows a photo of HandUnit and some text of information which says that "We play as Michael Afton, the older brother", however, i have heard that the freddy files have some fake information and a lot of fanart, so while i don't think this is a Mikebro proof, is still something i want point out Bonus: Ok, i have been doing some researching and, in fact, The Freddy Files isn't a confident source, since it says that Afton (Scraptrap) and Scrap Baby are THEORIZED to be William and Elizabeth. </p><p>2-While i belive the Mikevictim theory, im not too sure about Mikebot, however Scott wanted to end the story in fnaf 4; and which do we have to proof the Mikevictim theory with just that? Fnaf world and the novels (Wait, no! Don't stop reading! I swear is not dumbest as it may seem), in the Clock Ending of fnaf world, 8 Bit Fredbear says that we have to leave breadcrums for "him", since the beginning cutscene and the ending itself features 2 glowing eyes (the same as 8 bit fredbear's) saying "I will put you back together", we can assume that the 8 bit Fredbear is the PFF, and that "him" is the crying child. Bonus: The Clock Ending Trophy is a silver crying child </p><p>Now, the breadcrums are obviously the clock minigames, which are the same as the fnaf 3 minigames, that meaning that the crying child is the fnaf 3 guard. Also, the gameplay of fnaf 4 being similar to the fnaf 1's may hint to him being also Mike Smichdt; and since Mike and Fritz were fired for the same reasons, it hints to the Crying Child being Fritz as well (also, Scott said that the easter eggs on the fnaf 4 minigames seem random, but they aren't, so the inclusion of the toys may be a hint to it too); that by itself links Crying Child to all the games without even having Sister Location on our hands (4 games 1 story, like the fnaf world teaser). </p><p>Now for the books, imagine that the games from Sister Location and onwards never existed, in that case, what the novels would help to solve? It wouldnt be the identity of the Marionette, because she was revealed to be Henry's daughter on ffps, and we know that scott made the novels partially canon, but still, made them with things to help us solve the lore; with that in mind, the novels maybe would help to support the mikebot theory. </p><p>Now, lets get out of that hypotethical case and go back to reality: The mikebro theory was created after sl and before ffps, and almost everyone believed it, however, it was right after that when the logbook was released, therefore CREATING the MikeVictim theory. So, in a Mikebro point of view, the logbook was made to give a little more evidence to the theory, even if it was a strange and weird evidence; so, if that was the case, why would scott do it if everyone was believing that theory already? (Plus, the logbook evidence supporting Mikebro is less and weaker than the logbook evidence supporting Mikevictim) Bonus: Also it wouldnt make sense to give weak evidence for a theory that everyone was believing because of Scott himself saying that Matpat's fnaf 1-SL timeline hit out of the park, but it would, in fact, make sense for giving strong evidence for the MikeVictim theory so he could correct one of Matpat's mistakes in the timeline. </p><p>Bonus: I'd like to talk a bit about Golden Freddy to debunk GoldenVictim: The spirit in the logbook seems to be Golden Freddy's soul, and as many of you already know, this spirit is most likely Cassidy; however, one of the problems with this theory is TOYSNHK ("The One You Should Not Have Killed"), who seems to be Golden Freddy soul, but doesn't seems to be Cassidy because she is a girl with black hair and TOYSNHK is mentioned as He/Him and seems to be blonde. For a long time i ignored this, thinking that the blonde hair maybe is just shiny hair (because if Scott would have tried to make the hair black, it wouldnt be visible) and the He/Him would be because Golden Freddy is a male character; but now, the story of "Fazbear Frights #3" called "The New Kid" is about a blonde blue eyed boy called Kelsey who dies springlocked in Golden Freddy, and TOYSNHK is a blonde boy with blue eyes (that last thing is if you invert the colors), also, Kelsey shakes violently inside the suit like Golden Freddy does in the UCN Cutscene. Now, am i saying that Cassidy isnt Golden Freddy? No, im saying that, in fact, both Kelsey and Cassidy posess Golden Freddy, in the ending of "The New Kid" the protagonist comes back to Freddy's because he is unsure if Kelsey actually died, he looks inside the suit but he can't find him and he tries to see if his corpse is deeper inside the suit so he puts his arm inside the mouth of Golden Freddy trying to touch the corpse, the springlocks fail and chomp his arm and while he is bleeding he tries to have a last look inside the suit and he indeed sees a corpse, but this one is black haired. Also, if Mikevictim is to be believed, the owner of the logbook was the crying child, and in the page about the happiest day minigame theres a picture of Marionette giving cake to a Girl with black hair and golden pigtails, who is the only human on the whole book and is believed to be Cassidy; in that same page Cassidy writes "The party was for you" which doesnt makes sense if Mike were the Big Brother, but it would make a lot of sense if Mike were ghe Crying Child, since the Happiest Day Minigame map is a reverted version of FFD's map in fnaf 4 minigames, which means that in that minigame the friends of the crying child are celebrating the party he never managed to have. Also the Crying Child can't be the Golden Freddy Soul (or any of the other souls) in that minigame because Cassidy wouldn't be telling him that the party was por him. Now you may say ¿If your theory is true, then why isn't another child with a Golden Freddy mask in the minigame to represent Kelsey? And the answer is pretty simple, because the whole point of Happiest Day is the souls being free but Kelsey doesnt want to rest, he just wants to torture William (like we see in ucn). To explain this better, let's imagine that Golden Freddy is just haunted by Cassidy, she along with the others is freed in happiest day, if she wanted to be free, why she suddenly wants to stay a torture William forever? That's really bipolar, however, it would make sense if Golden Freddy is posessed by two spirits, because just one of them (Cassidy) is freed in happiest day, meaning that is the other spirit (Kelsey) the one who tortures William forever. </p>

<p>[SPOILERS FROM FAZBEAR FRIGHTS #3: 1:35 AM, THE FOURTH CLOSET, AND THE SURVIVAL LOGBOOK, YOU ARE WARNED] </p><p>
</p><p>
</p><p>
Actually, one of the stories from 1:35 AM features Kelsey, a blonde boy with blue eyes that dies in a golden freddy suit shaking violently. </p><p>Why is this important? </p><p>In UCN, the animatronics constantly talk about The One You Should Not Have Killed (who is confirmed by Scott's words to be the creepy face you saw) and is mentioned with male pronouns by Mangle and Withered Chica. The face has blonde hair and, if you invert the colors, blue eyes. Also is obvious that The One You Should Not Have Killed is Golden Freddy. On the other hand, Cassidy is a girl, described in the books to have black hair and be the one possesing Bonnie. </p><p>So, am i saying that Golden Freddy is not possesed by Cassidy, but rather by Kelsey? </p><p>No and Yes; let me explain... </p><p>Cassidy may be possesing Bonnie on the books, however, in that same book Golden Freddy is not possesed by Kelsey neither, because the continuity in the books is different than the continuity in the games. Also, there's the Survival Logbook, a book that is based from the continuity of fhe games. This book belongs to Michael Afton, and it is haunted by a spirit, that spirit is possesing Golden Freddy, since his catchphrase (IT'S ME) is written multiple times on the book. A reddit user found a code of numbers on the book, which he used to solve the alphabet soup on the soup; obtaining the word Cassidy, which help us assume she is Golden Freddy's soul. However, in the book, there is a page with Marionette giving cake to a girl with black hair and pigtails (the only human on the whole book) in a page about the happiest day minigame; and in that minigame Marionette gives cake to Golden Freddy's soul. But then, that means that the one you shouldnt have killed cant be Kelsey, right?. Wrong, the book series where Kelsey's story appears was made to help us solve the blanks on the game's continuity; one of those blanks were "How can be Cassidy and the one you shouldnt have killed be the same person if their gender and physic appearance weren't the same?", and that is the only blank that Kelsey's story could fill (there's also the Fredbear=G. Freddy one, but in Dawko's interview you can notice how Scott talks about them like if their were the same, and also that was already confirmed in UCN). </p><p>Now, what i think is that Golden Freddy maybe is posessed by 2 spirits; in the Happiest Day minigame we see how all the souls are now free, however ucn shows us that the one you shouldnt have killed (Kelsey) refuses to rest in peace and keeps torturing William, so, it wouldnt make sense if the one you shouldnt have killed were the Golden Freddy soul on Happiest Day, because he doesnt want to be free; now, the Golden Freddy soul can't be the Crying Child because, back into the logbook, Cassidy writes in the happiest day page "The Party was for you", and some hints tells us that the book belongs to the Crying Child, and the map from that minigame is an inverted version of the map of Fredbear's in the fnaf 4 minigames, therefore, the party on the happiest day minigame was for the crying child, but he wasnt any of the souls from the minigame because Cassidy wouldnt have to tell him that the party was for him, and this also means that Cassidy was one of the souls on the happiest day minigame (not to mention the fact of the picture of Marionette giving cake to a girl that looks like Cassidy, in the same page of the logbook where she talks about the happiest day), so it makes sense if the Golden Freddy soul from happiest day is Cassidy. Another thing to mention is that at the end of "The New Kid" (Kelsey's story) Kelsey has misteriously dissapeared from the Golden Freddy suit and instead there's another corpse inside it, and this corpse has black hair, like Cassidy </p><p>So... Golden Freddy is possesed by Cassidy or by Kelsey? </p><p>Well, the answer is yes... </p>

<p>We have also made an oopsie and let one of the fundators (who btw was a killer) into our vr game as a virus; he made the vr tester slice his face and we had to sold the game to another company, but dont worry!, after that the beta tester of the second company (who is also one of our workers) has apparently eliminated the virus! She has been presenting an unusual behavior, looking for torture methods and realistic human masks on our computers, but her inspector told us that she is probabbly making a film project, so... everything's fine!!! </p>

<p>What happened with Glitchtrap? In the bad ending he merges with us and scapes, in the other it seems to be the same case, but then he is a plushie and is inside of Vanessa's mind, but still there is a cutscene on that same ending of him locking Ness and escaping. Did he left the game physically or just got inside of the head of Ness? And if that's the case, what does the locking cutscene mean? </p>

<p>We are talking of Ennard, gight? </p>

<p>I think it's just Scott's excuse to add Sabino 69 into the game </p> <figure class="article-thumb t " style="width: px">File:EXhdadlWsAILVQI.jpg <figcaption></figcaption></figure>

Same here too

<p>Since we are in the topic of people having a crush on baby, which "age" is she supposed to be? And i dont mean Elizabeth's age, i mean the design of the character; if you dont get it i will explain: The Bidybabs resembles babies or toddlers, bb resembles a kid about 10 years old, and Ballora resembles a grown up, but Baby always changes; in sl she looks like a 13 years old girl, in ffps she looks like a teenager, in tff she looks like a young adult (which is confirmed by the book) and in the concept art for "To Be Beautiful" she looks like a grown up about the same age as ballora. I don't know, but since i kinda ship her a little bit with BB (YES, I KNOW, i ship fnaf characters, so i dont have human rights, i admit it) i have always seen her character as a girl. </p>

<div class="quote"><i> <p>Starscream1998 wrote: PJ Heywood is credited as playing William Afton in FFPS. The only character with Heywood's voice is Scraptrap. It's really not rocket science.  </p> </i></div>
<p>I'm not saying that Springtrap and/or Scraptrap aren't William, but the good ol' Mikey Afton is also voiced by PJ Heywood (Also is Souldozer in Fnaf World, but i think that Souldozer being the Man Behind The Slaughter may be a little bit kinda stupid theory :v ) </p>

<p>Some things i'd like to point out: </p><p>1-In the freddy files i think theres a page on the SL section, which shows a photo of HandUnit and some text of information which says that "We play as Michael Afton, the older brother", however, i have heard that the freddy files have some fake information and a lot of fanart, so while i don't think this is a Mikebro proof, is still something i want point out </p><p>2-While i belive the Mikevictim theory, im not too sure about Mikebot, however scott wanted to end the story in fnaf 4; and which do we have to proof the Mikevictim theory with just that? Fnaf world and the novels (Wait, no! Don't stop reading! I swear is not dumbest as it may seem), in the Clock Ending of fnaf world, 8 Bit Fredbear says that we have to leave breadcrums for "him", since the beginning cutscene and the ending itself features 2 glowing eyes (the same as 8 bit fredbear's) saying "I will put you back together", we can assume that the 8 bit Fredbear is the PFF, and that "him" is the crying child. </p><p>Now, the breadcrums are obviously the clock minigames, which are the same as the fnaf 3 minigames, that meaning that the crying child is the fnaf 3 guard. Also, the gameplay of fnaf 4 being similar to the fnaf 1's may hint to him being also Mike Smichdt; and since Mike and Fritz were fired for the same reasons, it hints to the Crying Child being Fritz as well (also, scott said that the easter eggs on the fnaf 4 minigames seem random, but they aren't, so the inclusion of the toys may be a hint to it too); that by itself links Crying Child to all the games without even having Sister Location on our hands (4 games 1 story, like the fnaf world teaser) </p><p>Now for the books, imagine that the games from Sister Location and onwards never existed, in that case, what the novels would help to solve? It wouldnt be the identity of the Marionette, because she was revealed to be Henry's daughter on ffps, and we know that scott made the novs partially canon, but still, made them with things to help us solve the lore; with that in mind, the novels maybe would help to support the mikebot theory. </p><p>Now, lets get out of that hypotethical case and go back to reality: The mikebro theory was created after sl and before ffps, and almost everyone believed it, however, it was right after that when the logbook was released, therefore CREATING the MikeVictim theory. So, in a Mikebro point of view, the logbook was made to give a little more evidence to the theory, even if it was a strange and weird evidence; so, if that was the case, why would scott do it if everyone was believing that theory already? (Plus, the logbook evidence supporting Mikebro is less and weaker than the logbook evidence supporting Mikevictim) </p><p>What do you think? </p>

May be a hint to Elizabeth's death

<div class="quote"><i> <p>Starscream1998 wrote: Eh it happens, anyway back to the OP. Baby is hot and that's a fact because in FFPS she's literally burnt to death along with all the others. </p> </i></div>
<p>...i mean, he's not wrong... </p>