Board Thread:Fun and Games/@comment-26186871-20151215165811

I'm posting it here because I don't know where else I can post theories about something that is NOT a roleplay.

There seems to be a theory going on that all the FNAF games are a dream, by the crying child from FNAF4. This has been speculated because of the "Four games, one story" teaser, and "What is seen in the shadows is often misunderstood in the mind of a child.", and the fact that there seems to be evidence within the FNAF4 minigames that point to several factors that could lead to such a dream taking place, directly after the bite of '87. There is evidence both supporting this theory, and evidence against this theory, and it seems to be a mystery, even more so than where the Phantom toys are in FNAF3, and Phantom Bonnie. But, when you finish reading this series, you'll both understand what the theory is, and whether or not it is true.

Mainly, the theory in its finest, has several variations. Some say that the dreams aren't by the crying kid, but by the children around the place (The toy girl dreaming FNAF2, the Plushtrap one dreaming FNAF3, the creepy "they come to life at night" one dreaming FNAF1), but due to the stories being connected, this certainly isn't possible. So, the only dream theory that makes any sense whatsoever is that the same child. It also must be the crying child, because the nightmares of FNAF4 contain a backwards clip of Phone Guy from the 1st game.

These flips of logic are what we will use to determine the best dream theory there is, and then test it with logic to see how plausible the dream theory is. Then we will continue and see how plausible it is for it to NOT be a dream, and then a final comparison to see which theory is most likely. Many have used Scott in this, which is not correct, and in this analysis, Scott will not be used.

So, we have the conclusion that if the series is in fact a dream, it must be all in the dream of the same crying child, due to the links between the games. Also, due to the robots being seen as "out to get you" (Sure, they're not, there's a valid reason, but this is from the child's perspective), this must be after the Bite of 87, hence why Phone Guy refers to the Bite of '87.

Also, if this is a dream, FNAF2 is actually a sequel.. No, not within the dream, within the outside world.. the first game only contained the main 5 animatronics, while the second game added more.. And during dreams, things aren't always in sequential order.. In fact, ALL four games would be in the order they were released, with the minigames of the fourth game taking place just before it all. The memories returning to him.. As for evidence on where the third game takes place? The phantom animatronics, and also SpringBonnie, whom was never seen until this game. Also, the FNAF3 minigames, where the child explores this reality, and ends up exploring outwards through glitches, like the wall.. Dreams have mistakes, because they were made by imperfect beings-the dreamer!

However, here is when things get kind of.. Strange.. This'll be some points against the dream theory.. How could the child know about electromagnetic power? If this is all made up, how could there be doors that take power to close? This is a crying child, the only force a child would be aware of is gravity, so from his perspective, the doors should take power to OPEN, not the other way around. Granted, this could be a reference to the brother only closing the door on the first day, but you can only really dream about what you heard.. And nowhere in the six days leading up to (and including) the Bite of 87 do we hear any mention of electromagnetic doors, or a counterweight. I would call this theory debunked right on the spot, but there is a slight chance that he could have been smart enough to know what that is, or the doctor could have blurted it out when explaining to the parents about the electromagnetics of heart rate monitors. Though this theory loses some points for that.

Next, why would Bonnie and Chica be the first animatronics active in the dream? Foxy was the main one that led to the bite with Fredbear. Not Bonnie or Chica! Why would this be FREDDY Fazbear's Pizza, with Bonnie and Chica, but not Foxy? If you think this was because Foxy's head was torn off, you have to remember that the animatronics in these dreams are out to get the child. Besides, Freddy himself becomes active on Night 3, AFTER Foxy, and we don't see his head torn off in the FNAF4 minigames! There is just no reason to make Bonnie and Chica the most active in a dream, with these surroundings. This is more points against the dream theory. I'd once again call it debunked right away, but perhaps the 1983 ad for Fredbear and Friends focused mostly on these two animatronics. We don't even have the sound from the advertisments, who knows. But this doesn't seem likely, so.. More points against this theory.

Next we have a good link that might make this theory sound plausible-Foxy's jumpscare in FNAF1 matches that of the brother's jumpscare in FNAF4. Hmm.....

But then, we get something wrong again. How did the child get the idea of the PHONE GUY dying? According to this theory, the child is making the whole thing up, so where did he get the idea of the Phone Guy dying? Sure, we have the creepy girl saying if you die, they hide your body and never tell anyone, explaining his first night speech, but why PHONE GUY? Why not the brother? Speaking of which, who IS Phone Guy? We don't see him in any of the fourth game. There's some more points against the theory.

Of course, we also have Golden Freddy's jumpscare, his head, like his head was the one that caused the bite. Hmm...

So, after seven nightmares, and finding out that this is November, the child gets his pink slip and leaves his reality, after realizing that something's not quite right.. So he creates a new reality, that of FNAF2..

Watch for Part 2, where I move on to FNAF2.. (And yeah, the theory has a LOT of points against it. But we have to finish the analysis and compare which one is more pluasible. After all, we don't know how many points will be against this NOT being a dream. But as of roght now, I'm pretty confident that the dream theory is WRONG, especially since I'm here right now! But here, I'm only using REAL evidence!) 