Five Nights at Freddy's

I have an idea as to how the game can happen despite the physical impossibility of the Bite victim having nightmares.

You actually play as his brother, who has been wracked with intense guilt over what he and his dumb little buddies did, and rightfully so. As for the visions of IV bags, flowers, and pills: he tried to commit suicide and was hospitalized, either being rendered comatose in the attempt and only occasionally being aware that he was hospitalized, or he was still conscious, was kept in intensive care and proceeded to have intense nightmares in his sleep. If the flatline at the end of Night 6 is any indication, he didn't pull through.

edited 31st Jul '15 12:16:11 AM by TrashJack

I don't think scientists have actually figured out what cause dreams yet in the first place. There is a bunch of theories to what causes it yes but I seriously doubt loosing your frontal lobe would take away your ability to have nightmares.

Your brain can rewire itself if a piece is lost. You still loose parts of yourself (frontal lobe contains your decision making skills) but atleast you are not in a coma or a vegetative state. Look up Phineas Gage to see what happened to someone who lost there frontal lobe in an accident a century ago

To be brutally honest I never really liked Matt Patt's theories, or his fanbase. This theory in particular is banking on something that is not comfirmed in any sense of the word. The entirety of the brain is a lit when a dream is occurring no matter if it's a nightmare or a pleasant dream. Whether or not loosing a part of it counter acts that has never been tested as far as I know. That's all I will say on this topic as I rather not get told that I am whining again just because I dislike fanbases in general

^^^Again, dude, you are taking things too seriously. "Self centered", really?

That makes perfect sense. I pretty sure Scott already thought of that since the beginning.

So Pat, you can gloat your 'victory' all you want, but karma will jump scare you at any moment. And like he said, his theories on the series ain't done yet.

(cough cough)*DLC*(cough cough)

edited 31st Jul '15 5:44:24 PM by machop

What

Seriously, what the hell is with people's fan rage here? .-. I watched the video and it doesn't even say much besides that if victim has lost frontal lobe, there is evidence supporting that they shouldn't feel fear or see nightmares. Heck, video was intended to be posted before release of fourth game and then do lore video on it after its release

edited 31st Jul '15 2:59:11 AM by SpookyMask

Actually, here is a thing that actually confirms that the game does not take place in 1987.

Kid flatlines on night 5. Bite survivor, well, survived. The kid, didn't

Well he DID survive for a short period of time, anyways.

Aaaanyway, I've been back and forth on whether the Bite we see is the Bite of '87. My own doubts have been based on the perpetrator more than anything.

Phone Guy's words in the very first night of the very first game were (Paraphrased) "They used to walk around during the day too, then there was the Bite of '87". I've always taken that to mean that one was the direct cause of the other. What we see in FNAF 4 is a Bite caused by an animatronic on-stage, otherwise minding its own business. While it definitely doesn't look good for the restaurant, the animatronic was not at fault. Granted, main weakness here is that daytime free-roam probably would be stopped at least temporarily due to the publicity.

There's also the whole Fredbear TV show thing. An '83 in a sea of '87s, both here and in the teasers' source code, is suspicious and, as a previous poster mentioned, The Law of Conservation of Detail makes that doubly so.

I do like the idea that you're actually playing as the brother, likely seeing things through his little brother's eyes as he remembers that horrible day.

I can see why people might dislike scott. It's a significant issue with internet related things where those that succeed in areas not traditional to success take hell for it (See any youtuber who makes a living off of it). In terms of professionalism I honestly think scott is more respectable than some of the larger game developers, his work is quality and he doesn't break down into random tantrums over small criticism. Furthermore after further consideration, he did violate common statistics, he worked his ass off to release 4 games of moderate quality but short quantity and it worked, so apparently the statistics were wrong.

Tall Poppy Syndrome is really sad when you think about it.

Frankly given all the times I see Bite of '87 referenced, I think it's a Red Herring.

edited 31st Jul '15 6:59:50 AM by stevebat

@3076 I had considered this possibility as well. That can also loop into the theory that the main character of this is also the main character of FNAF1 or maybe FNAF3, wanting to get answers for what was going on in there.

If this is the older brother seeing these monsters, then how do the toys in the room fit into this?

I for one think these are the child's nightmares, and that they take place between cutscenes 5 & 6, which would give credibility to Phone Guy's statement.

As for the free-roam issue, it is not impossible that the brother and his posse lied that the kid bumped into the robot while it was walking around, causing it to retaliate in the worst way possible.

Except that implies there actually is freeroaming mode for these ones. Seeing how we know they are still using spring suits, I doubt it. So "My brother ran into animatronic" doesn't really fit,

Hi 1st time post in this thread. Any reason why it is call the bite of '87? that kinda says this happen before.

The name itself was dropped by Phone Guy pretty early into the first game.

Seems even Scott pointed out that MatPat's logic is flawed because of something in-game

See? Scott and he are being jovial about it, you guys didn't need to be miffed about it earlier

edited 31st Jul '15 2:15:50 PM by SpookyMask

Is that from the most recent of Mat Pat's videos? I can't find the comment.

I watched the video

and its when Pat goes" No, It can't be about another Kid it has to be about the victim of the Bite of 87!"

Sorry Pat... You are just no match for Scott in this game of mental crafting.

I can't say I'm a fan of Game Theory. Not because I take it personal, just cause I don't really like some of the theories he comes up with. I get that he's not serious, just that I don't really enjoy his videos. And I love going deep into stories to come up with theories, part of the reason why I like the FNAF games.

I KNEW IT! Scott, you've done it again! ;)

Also, just an update: Does anyone here have a feeling that Nightmare looks like a teddy bear version of Rez (no, not the band) from the Gex The Gecko series?

And in that case, I'll be leaving since no-one will remember about anything from Gex. (runs and slams the door)

edited 31st Jul '15 5:47:42 PM by machop

Thank you Scott! Thank you for clarifying this crucial detail!

But now The Toy Animatronics make no sense.

Crucial detail?

He really didn't clarify anything, but people in the "Not the Bite of 87 camp" now have extremely vague word of god to support it.

I'm in said camp and I still don't think this very vague comment really bends things one way or another.

Well, I think I get what's going on.

Let's step back to FNAF 2, specifically the "Give Gifts, Give Life" minigame. You give a gift to four children's graves, then give each of them a mask (Freddy, Bonnie, Chica, and Foxy). THEN Golden Freddy pops out of a fifth grave...without the Puppet shown giving him a gift or mask.

So if that holds true, and Golden Freddy being around isn't the result of what the Puppet did, then where did he come from? The fact that Scott just acknowledged that FNAF 4 might not be the Bite, coupled with the flatline sound at the end of FNAF 4's Night 6...well...I think we know who and what Golden Freddy is now.

This explains how the film can claim to cover the Bite of '87...because none of the games have yet. FNAF 4 really is taking place in 1983 after all.

We still have Mangle in the kid's home, and Toy Bonnie in the toy collection.

Also, someone mentioned that free-roam couldn't be involved because these are the spring animatronics. When did the games say that the spring animatronics aren't capable of free-roam?

edited 31st Jul '15 8:49:18 PM by TroPartner