“The books offer a closer peek at Henry and William Afton how their partnership flourished early on and how their view of the animatronics evolved over time.
” “Thoughtful fans might want to give these sections a closer look to determine how they impact the story of the games as well.
” Right there.
Clear as crystal.
For years, I've been trying to piece together the story of these games.
Right? But one thing has always served as a major sticking point and that thing has been.
Now, Admittedly these books enter the series at a tough time, FNAF 4 had released a few months prior.
The game that, to this day, serves as the single biggest point of frustration for anyone trying to piece together the lore.
Scott always trolls us.
See, also the repeated use of the name “Jeremy”, but THIS one, THIS ONE GAME was just too much.
It was a game that played with so many different ideas.
It played with dreams, and dates, and bites, and balloon boys, and new characters, and new toys, kids that look like established characters.
I mean, what was real? What wasn't? No one had any idea and still to this day, We are at a loss about what this game means for the entire franchise as a whole and then shortly after that FNAF World, would enter the picture, and well, we all know how well that one went.
*sad trombone sounds* So, needless to say, it was a sensitive time for the series and Sandwiched in between it all, was “The Silver Eyes”, the start of the novels, a story set in the FNAF universe, but not really? Question mark? Scott Cawthon, when the books first came out, tried to make it clear what role these played in the greater story, but I don't know if it helped things.
Here's his quote: “The truth is that after a while, lore can become so dense that there isn't any room for a story anymore.
” “Another truth is that what makes for a good game, doesn't necessarily make for a good book.
” “Sometimes a timeline gets so full that the only way to tell a real story is have that story set in a different timeline, ” “an alternate universe.
A different location, or perhaps from a vantage point that isn't entirely what it appears to be.
” It's an interesting quote.
True to Scott's style, it doesn't give anything away I mean, everyone immediately latched on to this idea that the books were somehow a separate and alternate universe, but if you come back and read that quote again, like I just did here for the first time in years writing this script It's actually only one of the possibilities that he raised, In fact, now that all three of the books have come out and completed the main story arc, We actually know what they really were.
It was that last thing, “A vantage point that wasn't entirely what it appeared to be.
” Now, spoiler alert for the books, But basically at the end of this one, the grand finale, “The Fourth Closet”, it's revealed that our main character, Charlie, is an animatronic re-creation of a dead girl; that the brilliant roboticist (is that a word?), Henry, Co-founder of Freddy's, had a daughter named Charlotte who was kidnapped and killed by his partner, William Afton, at the age of three.
And that, out of his grief, he [Henry] rebuilt her, and that the character that we've been following for all three of these books isn't actually a human being, but just a glorified animatronic that grows older with time.
Now, it sounds really weird, but, here, let me explain.
So, “The Four Closets”, what that's in reference to, basically, Henry created four versions of that robot; each one meant to simulate a different life stage that she would never get to experience.
Toddler, tween, teen, adult.
Thus allowing this robot child to “grow up” over time.
Infusing each one of those robots with fabricated memories of a childhood he created using a camera and tripod, and if you think that sounds weird then you haven't finished reading this book, my friends, because this book jumps so many sharks(calm down MatPat), but that is NOTHING compared to what this book does to the animatronic “Baby” that we all know and love.
Baby, you know, the clown girl.
Well, in the books, she's actually the perfect fourth adult version of Charlotte, but she's also the robot that still, like we see in the games, devours William Afton's daughter, Elizabeth, and then goes on to get possessed by her.
So, this one robot is simultaneously Elizabeth's soul inside of Charlie's adult body, but in addition to dancing, and singing, and extruding out ice-cream, she also has the ability to switch between looking like a passable human, so much so that a character and here actually gets aroused by her – game therory baby kisses him ohhhhhh!!!!! no joke! And also, Expanding, somehow, into a giant clown-shaped robot.
The one that we all know and love.
She does this by using a combination of needles with little balls on the end, as well as sound illusion disks.
I mean, how ridiculous is this, right? It's a good thing nothing that stupid appears in the games fucking sound ilusion discks WTF *music and weird dinging sounds* Yep.
Yeah, they're in the games, aren't they? They are.
Actually, if you look at Baby's design as it's presented in the games, You see exactly what this book is talking about.
The needles with the little balls on the end, and yeah, even the weirdo sound illusion discs.
You might see where I'm going with this, right? Well, many hardcore fans want to dismiss the books and treat them as a separate entity.
Wall them off entirely from what's going on in the games.
You just can't.
This book right here, “Silver Eyes”, is what allowed me to know that Purple Guy's name was gonna be revealed as William Afton, before Sister Location actually revealed that to be the case.
“Those aren't the design choices we were curious about, Mr.
” *excited screams of a victorious theorist* These are the things that confirm that Susie and Fritz were “Missing Childrens Incident” victims.
Before it appeared in FNAF 6 “The Fourth Closet” explained what Candy Cadet's stories were all about.
Five animatronics, five souls, all melted down into one entity, but, because my theories based on the books tended to frustrate hardcore community members, I backed off of using them.
But here we are now, me sitting on the couch reading THIS.
The Freddy Files: Updated Edition.
Which, in addition to including more fanart than a typical Game Theory episode, *o o f* Also has that quote that I mentioned from earlier.
Here on page 222, second to last page in the book, “Thoughtful fans might want to give these sections [about Henry and William] a closer look to determine how they impact the story of story of the games as well.
” No denying it now, friends.
These things, right over here, these three? They're important.
They are here *smacc* to stay *smacc* So, for today's theory, I threw away everything.
All our assumptions, all the things that I thought we had solved from the games, and I took a fresh clean, look at this franchise- this time starting from the perspective.
of the books, and that brought me down an insane thought train.
Now, I don't necessarily think that today's theory is right.
I DEFINITELY think that there are plenty of holes in it, but I also don't think it's out of the realm of possibility for the story that Scott is trying to tell.
It's a theory that's worth chewing on because it simultaneously overturns a lot of the assumptions that we've made about this series while also filling in a lot of logical holes in the timeline of events.
This is a big one and I'm curious to get your thoughts on it.
Big like “What we missed in FNAF 4” kind of big.
Here's my theory for you today.
Mustard Man, you know, Orange Guy from FNAF 6? I'm gonna say he's Henry, original creator of the animatronics Co-owner of Fredbear's Family Diner.
That would make THIS Henry's house, in turn that would thereby make FNAF 4 his house as well; and if that's his house then this is Henry's son, and this is Henry's other son That's right.
Crying child isn't any member of the Afton family, he is Henry's son, and then that would make this and this, Henry's daughter, and therefore this then would be Henry's daughter's empty room.
Now, Hold on, I am sure there are plenty of you hardcore FNAF-ers out there who are ready to tear this huge list apart.
“ThIs iS clEaRlY thE AFtOn hOuSeHolD” “We hAVe eStaBlishED thIs tiMe anD tIme agAIn sinCe tHe relEaSE of SIster LoCatIon”, but stay with me.
Sit back, relax, Am I kiddin', pull out your pen and paper, start taking notes for your angry rage comment down below, This is a FNAF theory unlike anything we've ever talked about.
So, let's just jump into it So, I already told you the big reveal at the end of “The Fourth Closet”.
That our Protagonist Charlie is a robot built in the image of Henry's dead daughter, but there is one last twist here, on the very last page of the book.
We go to visit Charlie's grave, the real Charlie, the child who was kidnapped and killed at an early age.
It's a grave that ends up high on a hill, under a lone tree, similar to a very familiar scene that we see in the games, at the end of FNAF 6, the gravestone ending.
And on it we're told the following words were etched into the stone, “Beloved daughter Charlotte Emily, 1980-1983.
” First off, her last name is Emily? I mean, there's no other name written here.
So that isn't her middle name, So Henry's last name is Emily.
We're talking about the Emily family household? It's just weird.
I mean, this is a book series filled with animatronics that are possessed by human children and Metallic soul glue(I need some), but Emily as your last name? That has to be the single largest stretch of imagination out there! And no offense to anyone with Emily as their actual last name.
I know it's a real thing.
I'm just over exaggerating my rage for comedic effect.
But the important thing here is the date, right? Born in 1980 died in 1983 '83.
Should sound familiar, right? Well, why does it matter? FNAF 4, FNAF 4, a game that ends with someone getting themselves bitten is not depicting the bite of '87, like we all assumed when we first saw that scene, but instead is a game that is set in the year 1983.
It frustrated everyone.
I mean, why would you choose to do that, Scott? It made NO sense for the story that we'd become familiar with by that point in the series.
It made no sense Until today, we know that the gravestone is real.
We know that Henry truly has a daughter who dies and goes on to become the puppet in the games.
So, what if that death took place in 1983 like we see in the book? Opens up a lot of possibilities, You see, the other thing that never quite gets explained is this empty girls' room that we're allowed to explore throughout FNAF 4's minigame.
Clearly there's a reason it's here, but we never get a clue as to why or who that room could belong to.
This, in turn, led all us FNAF theorists to speculate wildly about the owner of this room.
Anyone with two X chromosomes was up for debate This pigtailed girl, And that was it.
Honestly, because she was literally the only girl that was introduced into the series at this point.
Later, when Sister Location came out, we got ourselves a second girl and everyone celebrated.
It was Afton's daughter, Elizabeth, so that room had to be hers, right? I mean, the game was even alluding to it being hers because it was the Sister Location(hah I get it), but let's stop for a minute and question all of those assumptions, because that's what they are.
There's not a whole lot of proof here.
What if that girl's room in FNAF 4 for belonged to Charlie? Charlotte.
Henry's daughter, who dies in 1983.
I mean the room is empty, after all, and we're not seeing a whole heck of a lot of girls wandering around the playground area.
And the year certainly matches the year of The disappearance and death from the books.
Could that girl's room in FNAF 4 actually be Charlotte Emily's room? Could this whole house from FNAF 4 actually be the Henry-Emily household? Consider this, in the second novel, “The Twisted One's”, a climactic final battle happens in an underground animatronic facility.
Sounds a bit like our Sister Location.
When our heroes emerge to the surface, they find themselves in the ruins of a familiar house.
Here's the quote: “Don't you see where we are?” Charlie whispered.
“John, It's my dad's house, It's the room we found.
” The underground facility isn't under William Afton's house.
Instead, in the books, It's hidden under Henry's house.
And now, what do we see in the games? a hidden facility buried directly under the FNAF 4 house.
A house that we've been assuming, up until this point, to be Afton's, house, but it's starting to look more and more like it might be Henry's, and that's not all, let's take a minute to flashback to FNAF 6 Shall we? Now, overall, I feel like we've done a pretty darn good job of wrapping up this games loose ends.
We know all the names on the different gravestones, we know what Candy Cadet is rambling on about, we know that fruity maze girl here is Suzie, who gets lured away and stuffed into Chica.
Heck, we even know that the game itself- This building.
Could be the potential box where the pieces all come together and eventually get burned away, but the one thing that we don't know is the answer to Midnight Motorist.
a minigame that, true to form, was the one moment in every FNAF game where everyone collectively looks at the screen and then slams their head on the desk.
*bO OM* What?! There's an Orange Guy now?! Who the heck is the kid? Where did he go? Why is this window broken? Why are there footprints outside of the window? What is going on? I mean, we have smoothed over so much of this franchise and I feel so confident about so much of this lore and that game that one little minigame is the one that just, like, Niggles the back of my mind.
If I could ask Scott Cawthon one thing about this entire franchise, This is the one that I want him to explain.
I don't care about anything else This is the one that I feel so Befuddled on.
Why I'm so determined to solve it, and why I'm doing today's theory, because in the past I've felt fairly Confident saying that the mustard man here is William Afton because he drives a purple car, He's driving away from the scene where the puppet girl died, but now I'm not so sure.
It always bothered me, and literally everyone else, that a guy who has been associated with one color, the color purple, for the entirety of this franchise is suddenly orange I tried to dismiss it as Scott pulling a Scott, but you know, that's not the most satisfying answer It doesn't feel conclusive, you know, and more importantly those footprints outside of the window I mean, why are they there? Either an animatronic went to meet this boy outside of his window, but that seems unlikely based on how we know these animatronics behave, or it was someone in a costume Showing up to lure the boy out of his room.
That one definitely seems like the more likely solution, but the only person in the entirety of this franchise who would do something like that is big ol Willie A, and why would he do something like that to his own kid, in his own house, and then get mad about it? Things just don't add up cleanly! It's a question that really started to bother me when I was playing FNAF VR: Help Wanted Glitchtrap is clearly modeled after the first suit ever used by William Afton.
You can tell based on his stitching, this is a hand sewn bodysuit rather than any sort of animatronic suit that we would see later in the series.
This also coincides with the timing of the Midnight Motorist cut scene, which shows the birth of The Puppet.
One of the first major deaths of the entire FNAF story.
Glitchtrap's suit also, very distinctly, has three toes.
Just like the footprints outside of the boys window.
Now, as we know, Scott Cawthon likes to clarify things in his next game, and if there was one huge question mark left from before that Midnight Motorist minigame was it.
So we have ourselves a suit that would have been in use around the time of the minigame, as well as a matching foot pattern to the design that we see in the minigame, heck, we even have ourselves a potential reference to it from Ultimate Custom Night and the Toy Chica cutscenes.
“He'll be mine by the end of the day.
I just know it.
I told him to come over later.
” “That should be enough, and if he doesn't show up, I'll just go to his house!” “And if he doesn't open the door, I'll just find a window!”And here's where everything starts coming together Let's assume that William Afton, in his Glitchtrap suit, with its three toes, is the one who's standing outside of that window.
Outside of Henry's house He lures the crying child out.
Now, Henry's son, to bring him back to the place that he loves more than anywhere else in the world.
Fredbear's Family Diner.
But we know that this is also the night where William takes his first victim, Charlotte, who's killed outside of the diner.
This would explain why, in FNAF 6, the crying child would actively run to Fredbear's against his father's will, but later, come FNAF 4, he would be terrified of stepping foot there.
“Remember what you saw?” and all that, as psychic friend Fredbear reminds him constantly.
He saw the murder happen that night.
That is what we're seeing in that FNAF 6 minigame Meanwhile, we have ourselves the Mustard Man who we're assuming is gonna be Henry.
He has a kid who does not only run away on multiple occasions, but he's so determined to do so that he's willing to break through his own window to get there.
So, how do you keep him safe at home? well, you lock him in his room just like we see happen in FNAF 4, but maybe locking him in his room isn't enough Maybe you would also have a series of security cameras hidden around the room, heck, hidden around your house.
Hiding a security camera inside the Fredbear plushie that he takes everywhere, to keep your son safe.
To keep track of where he is at any given point in time.
Heck! Maybe you could go so far as to design sound Illusion discs to make him scared of the animatronics that he's seeing.
His once beloved animatronic friends now terrifying to him.
Causing nightmarish hallucinations of the characters.
Just like the discs that we see hidden inside a Funtime Freddy's chest in Sister Location The same discs that Henry is confirmed to have created in the books.
These two right here.
They play a huge role in these two books.
Though, most of them in the books bear(hah, bear, get it?) Afton's name, they were originally created by Henry in an attempt to warp the world around him.
To hide from the grief that he felt after the loss of his child.
Discs that, wouldn't you know it, Afton hides inside the Funtime robots? Just like we see in the games, but as we see him FNAF 4, it isn't enough.
The crying child still winds up at Freddy's, he still gets himself bitten, and he dies with that iconic line in yellow: “I will put you back together.
” Now remember that quote I keep going back to in this book right? Here second to last page.
(how could we forget?) Thoughtful fans might want to revisit sections of how Henry and Afton's view of the robots change over time in order to determine how they impact the story of the games? Well, Henry in the books uses the robots to bring his daughter back to life.
He rebuilds her.
He puts her, quite literally, back together.
He used the robots to try and heal his grief I mean if anyone in this series is gonna say a line like “I will put you back together.
” It's Henry.
Heck, maybe Mustard Man is the color that he is in order to better match the color of this FNAF 4 text “I will put you back together.
” In yellow, and yeah, sure, It's yellow and not orange, but guess what? Purple Guy was pink in his first outing.
as the series has gotten darker so too has the color palates, but seriously, there are two colors that are relatively similar, maybe there's a connection there.
And if the crying child is Indeed Michael as I've talked about a lot in past theories, Henry literally rebuilding his lost son like he does his lost daughter in the books explains all of the weirdness of Mike's behavior throughout the series.
How he's able to survive being scooped, how he has fragmented memories of his past, how he doesn't die after puking up mom's robot spaghetti, how he's only able to die By fire.
“I should be dead, but I'm not.
” It's also worth noting that at no point in the series is Michael ever explicitly identified as Michael Afton.
Now, It seems like Mike in Sister Location is referring to William Afton as “father”, “Father, it's me, Michael.
” and him saying, “I'm going to come find you.
” As Springtrap appears, definitely makes it seem like he's going out and looking for William, but that may just be another Scott misdirect It's open to interpretation, I mean, this scene alone still has people convinced that Springtrap is Mike trapped inside of the suit.
Even though, I feel like it's pretty well established at this point that it's William Afton in there.
it's-it's still Will-trap, but there are people who are vehemently determined that Mike-trap is the reality of the canon, of this series.
Regardless of the whole Michael stuff, William Afton, in these books, is all about achieving immortality through the robots.
He's interested in the science of it all.
He wants to study the original FNAF gang and replicate the living metal that resulted from their deaths.
That's why we see him tearing apart the robots in FNAF 3's minigames.
He wants access to their metal.
He wants to harvest it to run experiments.
He wants to melt down those living endoskeletons so he can harness the possessed metal to create the funtime animatronics.
I mean, that is the whole point of Candy Cadets stories in FNAF 6, five things melted down to create one thing; and it's exactly what we see happen as a huge plot point in the final book.
Henry, on the other hand, is the emotional one.
He's a creator who gets too invested in his own work.
He's a bit of a neglectful father while he's alive, but he's devastated when he loses his daughter.
Turning to the one and only thing that he knows and understands to try and bring her back, Robots.
He goes to extreme lengths to use this robotic skills to try and bring her back to life, and he does it, he succeeds.
He creates the most absurdly life-like humanoid animatronics ever in science-fiction and they have to be to do some of the stuff that you see happen in these books, because it is absurd, but if we are truly meant to apply the themes of these books to the games, then this isn't the Afton family household.
It doesn't make sense.
It's the Emily family household.
It would explain the factory under the house, it would explain the empty girls bedroom in FNAF 4, it would explain the 1983 date that were presented with it, would say why Mustard Man is yellow, why there are footprints outside the window, why the crying child is suddenly scared of Freddy's, and it would even go so far as to explain the line, “I will put you back together.
” I mean, are there holes to this thing? Absolutely, are there things that are difficult to explain, are you kidding me? This is FNAF, gonna be true no matter this is William's house, Henry's house, or the frickin white house.
It's an extreme theory, but I think it's one that's worth considering because of its alignment with the books, and because of the lingering threads that it answers.
Which is why today, I encourage you to discuss, down below in the comments, discuss over on Reddit, and most importantly to remember, that it's all just a theory.
A GAME THEORY THANKS FOR WATCHING.