<p>I used to play them back in high school, but i fell off completely and i was just wondering if y'all knew any good ones i should try.
</p><p>thanks folks!
</p>
(Edited by Lexandotherdrugs)
3,011
pages
ALL POSTS
All posts by Lexandotherdrugs
<div class="quote"><i>ToyFred9907106 wrote:
So, what does that mean?</i></div>
<p>what does what mean? my theory? </p><p>it means i go with the gender bend theory </p><p>wildly popular today and often used in novels for big twists </p>
So, what does that mean?</i></div>
<p>what does what mean? my theory? </p><p>it means i go with the gender bend theory </p><p>wildly popular today and often used in novels for big twists </p>
(Edited by Lexandotherdrugs)
<p>that was more confusing than my insane theory lmao
</p>
(Edited by Lexandotherdrugs)
<div class="quote"><i>ToyFred9907106 wrote:<div class="quote">
<p>Lexandotherdrugs wrote:
holy fuck this thread blew up
</p><p>lol but ok yes the sex-change thing.
</p><p>there were a lot of thoughts pointing to the possiblity that sammy was actually a girl. charlie's memory possibly being a little spotty, afton saying his line "i took you" referring to maybe he meant to take charlie but took sammy instead and sammy escaped somehow and (SPOILERS!!) that's the same person that approaches the diner at the end of book 2. also explains why that person looked JUST like charlie from far away? COME ON THAT PART?? it's been established charlie has a twin and everyone spots someone that looks JUST LIKE CHARLIE but ends up NOT BEING CHARLIE??? it's like smack dab in front of us!! of course it's sammy!!!
</p><p>sex change or not that person at the end of book 2 is 100% sammy.
</p><p>the only reason i add that sammy is a girl is that it would play into afton's line "i took you". is all and maybe explain the confusion further.
</p>
</i></div>
Now I'm confused.</div> <p>
</p><p>so here's my deal. i read twisted ones and actually re-read silver eyes and here's my thoughts. </p><p>what if charlie just doesnt remember things perfectly. what if she's remembering incorrectly and sammy is a girl? that would explain (SPOILERS) at the end of the book when a girl walks up to the diner and everyone mistakes her for charlie from far away. what if that was actually sammy? </p><p>that to me is a very simple possibility </p><p>
bottom line, in literature, the “twin thing” allows for the author to have a lot of room to pretty much do anything they want. especially in a psychological suspense thriller novel like this. the second a “twin” is introduced, there’s endless possibilities for twist and turns. so never take it as simple as “oh it’s just her twin!” like no. it’s never “just a twin”. </p><p>but if we were thinking bigger... here's a wild thought. </p><p>what if there is no sammy? what if there is no twin at all? </p><p>what if charlie when she remembers these things she's actually seeing herself not another kid. </p><p>what if this charlie is an animatronic? or perhaps some other form of that where she isn't herself but she thinks she is. and her mind and the animatronic’s are somehow linked making certain memories fuzzy.. but at the same time picture perfect (referring to that photographic memory she mentions). that would explain the confusion when charlie demands afton (springtrap) to explain why he took sammy and not charlie and he replies, "i took you". </p><p>what if charlie just isn't human? what if she wasn't playing in that costume/animatronics closet? what if that's just yano.. where she was kept and she watched this little girl get kidnapped? and by some wacky turn of events managed to get into some skin and pass as charlie? </p><p>what if when afton says "i took you" he already killed charlie and he's just talking to her soul trapped inside this exsoskeleton and she honest to god just thinks shes a normal living breathing girl. what if afton was the one to set that up? get away with the perfect murder? can’t be convicted of kidnap and murder if the kid is right there, right? </p><p>OR maybe henry built a "charlie" after she was kidnapped and killed... </p><p>overcome with sadness, desperately trying to build a family and realizing after the first one was such a “success” he was going too far and his life was a never ending cycle of real and not real so he just offed himself? That would explain why no one not even charlie would know this horrible truth about herself, because the only man who did killed himself. </p><p>just a thought. </p>
Now I'm confused.</div> <p>
</p><p>so here's my deal. i read twisted ones and actually re-read silver eyes and here's my thoughts. </p><p>what if charlie just doesnt remember things perfectly. what if she's remembering incorrectly and sammy is a girl? that would explain (SPOILERS) at the end of the book when a girl walks up to the diner and everyone mistakes her for charlie from far away. what if that was actually sammy? </p><p>that to me is a very simple possibility </p><p>
bottom line, in literature, the “twin thing” allows for the author to have a lot of room to pretty much do anything they want. especially in a psychological suspense thriller novel like this. the second a “twin” is introduced, there’s endless possibilities for twist and turns. so never take it as simple as “oh it’s just her twin!” like no. it’s never “just a twin”. </p><p>but if we were thinking bigger... here's a wild thought. </p><p>what if there is no sammy? what if there is no twin at all? </p><p>what if charlie when she remembers these things she's actually seeing herself not another kid. </p><p>what if this charlie is an animatronic? or perhaps some other form of that where she isn't herself but she thinks she is. and her mind and the animatronic’s are somehow linked making certain memories fuzzy.. but at the same time picture perfect (referring to that photographic memory she mentions). that would explain the confusion when charlie demands afton (springtrap) to explain why he took sammy and not charlie and he replies, "i took you". </p><p>what if charlie just isn't human? what if she wasn't playing in that costume/animatronics closet? what if that's just yano.. where she was kept and she watched this little girl get kidnapped? and by some wacky turn of events managed to get into some skin and pass as charlie? </p><p>what if when afton says "i took you" he already killed charlie and he's just talking to her soul trapped inside this exsoskeleton and she honest to god just thinks shes a normal living breathing girl. what if afton was the one to set that up? get away with the perfect murder? can’t be convicted of kidnap and murder if the kid is right there, right? </p><p>OR maybe henry built a "charlie" after she was kidnapped and killed... </p><p>overcome with sadness, desperately trying to build a family and realizing after the first one was such a “success” he was going too far and his life was a never ending cycle of real and not real so he just offed himself? That would explain why no one not even charlie would know this horrible truth about herself, because the only man who did killed himself. </p><p>just a thought. </p>
(Edited by Lexandotherdrugs)
<p>holy fuck this thread blew up
</p><p>lol but ok yes the sex-change thing.
</p><p>there were a lot of thoughts pointing to the possiblity that sammy was actually a girl. charlie's memory possibly being a little spotty, afton saying his line "i took you" referring to maybe he meant to take charlie but took sammy instead and sammy escaped somehow and (SPOILERS!!) that's the same person that approaches the diner at the end of book 2. also explains why that person looked JUST like charlie from far away? COME ON THAT PART?? it's been established charlie has a twin and everyone spots someone that looks JUST LIKE CHARLIE but ends up NOT BEING CHARLIE??? it's like smack dab in front of us!! of course it's sammy!!!
</p><p>sex change or not that person at the end of book 2 is 100% sammy.
</p><p>the only reason i add that sammy is a girl is that it would play into afton's line "i took you". is all and maybe explain the confusion further.
</p>
(Edited by Lexandotherdrugs)
<p>has anyone here heard/read my theory that sammy is actually a girl? and that sammy was the person at the end of book 2?
</p>
(Edited by Lexandotherdrugs)
<div class="quote"><i>Jeffrey Penguin wrote:
Unless if there's gonna be another saga...</i></div>
<p>
</p><p>i mean there are 3 books... </p><p>GREAT. WE GAVE BIRTH TO ANOTHER FUCKIN TWILIGHT </p>
Unless if there's gonna be another saga...</i></div>
<p>
</p><p>i mean there are 3 books... </p><p>GREAT. WE GAVE BIRTH TO ANOTHER FUCKIN TWILIGHT </p>
(Edited by Lexandotherdrugs)
<p>those hardest to love are the easiest to get hurt by
</p><p>even easier for the most caring of hearts
</p>
(Edited by Lexandotherdrugs)
<div class="quote"><i>ToyFred9907106 wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>ToyFred9907106 wrote: (Waits for a FNAF 0). </p> </i></div>
<p>FNAF 0, must happen. </p> </div> <p>
</p><p>
</p> i am so on board for this
<figure class="article-thumb tright show-info-icon" style="width: 180px">
<figcaption> <p class="caption">YASSSS</p> </figcaption></figure>
<div class="quote"> <p>ToyFred9907106 wrote: (Waits for a FNAF 0). </p> </i></div>
<p>FNAF 0, must happen. </p> </div> <p>
</p><p>
</p> i am so on board for this
<figure class="article-thumb tright show-info-icon" style="width: 180px">
<figcaption> <p class="caption">YASSSS</p> </figcaption></figure>
(Edited by Lexandotherdrugs)
<div class="quote"><i>Tricakay27 wrote:
Yeah, the games certainly were full of mistakes. <p>Let's hope the movie doesn't make the same mistakes. </p> </i></div>
<p>
</p><p>the game was full of mistakes because scott literally had zero idea this shit was gonna blow up like it did! lol he didn't have a plot predetermined. this is scott guys, not stephen king lol </p><p>(you're still awesome scott!!) </p>
Yeah, the games certainly were full of mistakes. <p>Let's hope the movie doesn't make the same mistakes. </p> </i></div>
<p>
</p><p>the game was full of mistakes because scott literally had zero idea this shit was gonna blow up like it did! lol he didn't have a plot predetermined. this is scott guys, not stephen king lol </p><p>(you're still awesome scott!!) </p>
(Edited by Lexandotherdrugs)
(Edited by Lexandotherdrugs)
<p>just shooting me down completely by "noping" me lol
</p>
(Edited by Lexandotherdrugs)
(Edited by Lexandotherdrugs)
<p>you know what i mean?
</p><p>like this whole time we've been saying lefte was designed to capture the puppet and bring it to the fnaf6 location, but what if it was meant for something else or if it was originally a design for the sister location and the puppet decided to use it as a mode of transport. because we saw in the cut scene that the puppet you not handle the water, but the newer animatronic (aka lefte) could.
</p><p>just food for thought!!
</p>
(Edited by Lexandotherdrugs)
<p>This is something that always bothered me. In Henry's monologue at the end of fnaf6, he says something to the effect "i knew you couldn't stay away" in reference to his daughter being there.
</p><p>and i can't help but think, yes lefty supposedly was designed to capture the puppet, BUT what if he was designed for something else and the puppet just USED it to get to the fnaf6 location? what if it was by choice?
</p>
(Edited by Lexandotherdrugs)
<p>LMAO right?!
</p><p>but just fyi
</p><p>scott is very much involved in the movie. that was why there was a set back. he wanted more of a say in the movie. it was a big reason he switched to BH
</p>
(Edited by Lexandotherdrugs)
<p>yeah but creed didn't really have as much of a plot to play with as thick as fnaf.
</p><p>dont get me wrong it had plot but this has too much lore to not create something at least moderately decent. no?
</p>
(Edited by Lexandotherdrugs)
<p>PLOT TWIST
</p><p>the movie is just 80 minutes of kellan laughing into the camera.
</p>
(Edited by Lexandotherdrugs)