darkSpyro

Quote: MoonHorizons

Quote: Eevee88

Actually, it was NOT the bite of 87. It took place in 1983 ^.^

Also worse way to die ever,

Balloon boy was in my office, mangle was too, and I couldn't check lights. And foxy jumpscared me. YAY!

if so, then how could toy bonnie, mangle an other toy animatronic figures exist?

the fredbear and friends show or whatever is simply a rerun.

True... hmm... But, nvm, I got nothin.

Quote: Eevee88

Quote: MoonHorizons

Quote: Eevee88

Actually, it was NOT the bite of 87. It took place in 1983 ^.^

Also worse way to die ever,

Balloon boy was in my office, mangle was too, and I couldn't check lights. And foxy jumpscared me. YAY!

if so, then how could toy bonnie, mangle an other toy animatronic figures exist?

the fredbear and friends show or whatever is simply a rerun.

True... hmm... But, nvm, I got nothin.

The Purple Guy is the kid's dad theory maybe?

*ahem*

Quote: kardonis

*ahem*

Reveal Spoiler

This game can't take place in 87, and thus cannot be the bite of 87. Why? First of all, there's the direct 1983 from the TV easter egg, yes, it COULD be a re-run, but it's doubtful. Second, the location prominently features S-Bonnie and Fredbear, with nothing in the actual location about the original 4, meaning that this is 99% a location we've never seen, and probably Fredbear's diner, as it is his face plastered over the walls and such. Third, remember all the way back to F1, where the phone guy mentions the bite of 87 for the first and last time. He talks specifically about losing the frontal lobe, and how the animatronic bite the victim. During this bite, the kid's entire upper body is crushed, not just his head, and it was quite obvious the animatronic didn't bite the child, that the kid was stuffed into his maw.

Moving on from that, I personally believe that purple guy is the kids dad, who really wasn't a bad person, until some kids killed his son. He then proceeds to lure them to the back, in F2s location, and kill all four of them, for revenge. The puppet then places them into the suits, which causes them to possess and control them. The purple guy's son has essentially become a ghost of fredbear, AKA golden freddy. purple guy, realizing that the animatronics are dangerous and, to some degree, evil, goes to the new freddy fazbear location, in F1. He then destroys them and accidentally free the spirits, with either the ghost of puppet or his own son forcing him into the S-trap suit. Now in the third game, you, as the player, bring the souls of the bullies to their senses, and get them to re-enact the party, doing it properly, with each of them using it as a way to apologize for what they did. (notice how the masks are the same) The four bullies, the victim, and the puppet now all ascend, finally being freed.

EXACTLY!! Also, if it DOESN'T take place in 1987, why is mangle in the game?

BOX, BOX, BOX, BOX, WHATS IN THE BOOOX?!

Get it? It's a Wander over Yander reference.

Anyway, I really do want to know what's in the box. It will probably be revealed in what's coming this Halloween, or in the movie.

See, mangle being in the game, is confusing, to say the least. Especially because a girl has figures of all the toy animatronics in one of the mini games. At this point I don't have an explanation for it.

Also, there's a myth going around (might be true) that you can actually open the box, but there's some sort of trick to it involving night seven apparently.

okay, I've gathered my thoughts and now have a review for the 4th game. Also, I'd much appreciate it if any of you guys had feedback on my reviews, whether its something I missed, or ways I could do better when reviewing any other game in the future, FNaF related or not.



"What? Why?"

This was the first thing I thought of when Five Nights at Freddy's 4 was announced. It completely took me off guard. After how nicely FNaF 3 wrapped things up, I was not expecting there to be another game. My overall thoughts on the game leading up to release were mixed from then on- sometimes I wasn't too impressed with a teaser image, other times I completely fanboyed out, especially when I saw the first trailer. With Scott admitting he's bad with release dates and releasing FNaF 4 now, how is the overall game?

The story of FNaF 4 involves a young boy and his experience with Fredbear's Family Diner, the restaurant we learned came before Freddy Fazbear's Pizza in FNaF 2. At the same time, this child has to defend himself every night from the killer Freddy Fazbear animatronics. IN HIS OWN HOUSE. And for the sake of experiencing the story for yourself, like the last games, I won't say anything else. On one hand, the story really tells a great narrative of terror from a child's perspective that I think a lot of people can relate to. I remember when I was a kid, I was terrified of going to Chuck E. Cheese because the animatronics and people in costumes freaked me out so much. Combine that with the game's overall better production values, and it gives a nice story to be told. However, when connecting it with the overarching story of Five Nights at Freddy's and the lore behind it, this story fails in a lot of aspects. The game strives to answer questions the fans have been asking, but instead just causes more questions. Part of the fun with the game's lore was that the story was complete enough that we knew the whole thing, but was still vague enough in some areas that people could still theorize and make their own interpretations of the story. In this game, on top of causing a lot of plotholes within the overall story arc, the story is almost too vague, and seems to completely rely on players to make their own interpretation. I wouldn't exactly think that's a bad thing if the previous games hadn't at least already given us a solid overarching story. On it's own, the story succeeds. As part of the whole franchise, the story fails.

Gameplay wise, FNaF 4 does so much differently that you wouldn't even think you're playing a Five Nights at Freddy's game. Really, the only thing similar about this game is that you have to survive from 12am to 6am. The game is completely locked in the child's bedroom. You have 4 locations you can travel to: 2 bedroom doors, the closet, and the bed. you also have a flashlight to use in these locations. each location differs in ho you use them: the bed is used to fend off Freddy Fazbear by shining your flashlight on his smaller Freddies when they show up. The closet is used when Foxy appears, and you can only fend him off by closing the closet long enough to reset his pattern, similar to Pirate's Cove in the first game. The doors are used to fend off Bonnie, Chica, and to prevent Foxy from getting into the closet in the first place. When you go up to a door, you have two choices: shine your flashlight to see if any animatronic is there(and fend them off if they are there), or close the door when you hear breathing. If you shine th light when you hear breathing, or go back to the starting position without checking or closing a door long enough, the animatronics will kill you.

It sounds complicated, but it's rather simple to understand once you get used to it. The new mechanics actually work very nicely. it controls great and is paced very well, and the fact that we can freely move in this location(even if it is limited) is a nice touch. There are a lot of pros and cons surrounding this really different style of gameplay though. First off, the game itself looks great. This is definitely the best looking game in the series so far, as the game fully utilizes its 3D models. Second, the game's aesthetic and atmosphere is fantastic. The very idea that you play as a child and have to defend yourself from these animatronics in your own house makes the setting much more personal, isolated, and arguably terrifying than the last entries in the games. Combine that with horrifying animatronic designs, and you have a game that easily has the scariest atmosphere in the entire series... If only I could say the same about the sound design and the jumpscares.

Here's what makes Five Nights at Freddy's 4 seem almost as frustrating as the second game: The jumpscares in this game are the worst the series has ever had. In previous games, There was genuine build up to the jumpscares, and the sound design only helped cement that. Here, the sound design is very subtle. Unless you use headphones, it will be very hard to hear animatronics breathe, make steps, etc. there aren't any musical cues or sound cues that can very blatantly tell you if an animatronic is coming. Which means when a jumpscare does eventually come, it will come out of seemingly nowhere because there was barely anything telling you beforehand that it was coming. because of this, FNaF 4 has jumpscares that previous games in the series never had, and almost unconsciously mocked. The previous games used jumpscares so effectively because there was something to fear, AND there was build-up. this game has something to fear, but doesn't have the build-up, and ends up becoming the type of jumpscare game that a lot of players are getting tired of. When I play a horro game, i want to look away from the screen because I'm terrified about what's going to come. The last games could do that very well. This game, however, I'm usually looking away from the screen because of two things: I either need to focus on the sound cues that are easy to miss and not the game, or because I know a cheap jumpscare is going to come at any moment because of how subtle the sound cues are.

That's not even going into the technical problems this game has. Say what you want about Scott releasing the second and third games to early, but at least they were definitely complete. FNaF 4, on the other hand, was definitely released too early. The game has a lot of slowdown issues, loading issues, and twice i had the game completely crash. When I play the game, it takes quite a while for areas such as the doors to load up. Sometimes, I may not know if something is going to kill me until the last minute because of it. For example, one time I went up to a door to check the hallway with my light. However, the game was taking too long to actually load up the section. so I pressed the flashlight key a few times for when it did eventually load up. and as soon as it worked, I got jumpscared. And because of the problems with the game's sound design, there's a good chance you may not even know that a section is completely loaded, and you could end up making a mistake that feels cheap rather than your fault.

Five Nights at Freddy's 4 is quite the oddity for me. For everything that it gets right, it REALLY gets it right, such as the atmosphere, the isolation, the animatronics, the new gameplay mechanics, and the story(when told on its own and not causing problems with the overall one). But for everything it gets wrong, it REALLY gets it wrong, such as the sound design, the jumpscares, the story when referring to the overall franchise, and the technical problems. In some respects, I can say this game is the best in the series, but in other areas, it's also the worst in the series. If you like the Five Nights at Freddy's series, or horror games in general, play this entry with caution. Otherwise I can't really give this game a good recommendation unless you're really curious about it or a FNaF fan already.

Overall Rating~ 6/10. An above-average game, but still has glaring issues that may hinder your enjoyment.

- - -

new animatronic for 10/31 revealed!

So I've watched a whole playthrough of FNAF4 done by Markiplier, and saw the ending of Night 5...

http://www.comingsoon.net/movi...t-freddys-movieWow......

Scott decided to speak his feelings:
http://steamcommunity.com/app/...06989414847401/

Quote: Hot Dog 542

Scott decided to speak his feelings:
http://steamcommunity.com/app/...06989414847401/

Scott sounds like an awesome dude.

Quote: skylandersspyro

http://www.comingsoon.net/movi...t-freddys-movieWow......

Gil Kenan has literally only directed three films in his career: Monster House, City of Ember, and the Poltergeist remake. Monster House got nominated for an academy award and City of Ember and Poltergeist got mostly mixed reception.

On one hand, this does give a little more hope for the film adaptation of FNaF, because while Kenan's career is barren, his work has usually turned out at least average. but on the other hand, it still has lackluster talent in all other areas such as production, and for all we know this could be the director's success story or his first real flop because of it.

EDIT:
Quote: Hot Dog 542

Scott decided to speak his feelings:
http://steamcommunity.com/app/...06989414847401/

I have so much respect for this guy.

Seriously, the indie scene, let alone gaming in general, needs more developers like him. Even if he does releases his games too early.

All good news.

Now, after a lot of thought and looking through F4 as well as earlier games, I realize I've been misguided. My idea that the bite in F4 wasn't the bite of 87 was because of the phone guy in F2 mentioning fredbears being closed for years earlier. As well as a few other minor details.

But I realized something, this game doesn't take place in fredbears, it takes place in the FIRST freddy fazbear's pizza, the one before F2's "new" location. I figure this because it mainly focuses on fredbear and spring bonnie, like in F3's old tapes, where the phone guy talks about the spring suits, yet he exclusively talks about being "the face of freddy fazbear's pizza". Presuming that the game takes place in spring, due to the local flora outside the establishment, and if it closed in say, May, then it would give enough time for them to find a new location for F2 in the same year, around november as the paycheque states.

This review has an entertaining animation making fun of the animatronic's behaviour:

Don't mind me, just popping in with the FNaF 4 Game Theory.

Gotta love how MatPat put out a video saying "the creator of the game is wrong" before the game is even technically complete and had all of the story wrapped up

Gotta rake in those views, viewer retention time, likes, and subscriptions $$$, with them clickbait titles and thumbnails.

Quote: sonicbrawler182

Gotta love how MatPat put out a video saying "the creator of the game is wrong" before the game is even technically complete and had all of the story wrapped up

Gotta rake in those views, viewer retention time, likes, and subscriptions $$$, with them clickbait titles and thumbnails.

The only way that the DLC would change that would be to change the actual story itself of FNaF 4. Unless you think the DLC is going to go like "Whoops! Turns out you aren't playing as the bite victim, even though the entire game points to and focuses on that!", which would be kinda stupid.

Quote: spyrolvr96

Quote: sonicbrawler182

Gotta love how MatPat put out a video saying "the creator of the game is wrong" before the game is even technically complete and had all of the story wrapped up

Gotta rake in those views, viewer retention time, likes, and subscriptions $$$, with them clickbait titles and thumbnails.

The only way that the DLC would change that would be to change the actual story itself of FNaF 4. Unless you think the DLC is going to go like "Whoops! Turns out you aren't playing as the bite victim, even though the entire game points to and focuses on that!", which would be kinda stupid.

There have been good theories pointing to clues suggesting that it isn't the bite of '87 though. Which isn't hard to believe considering how this series has only lasted so long because of it's silly twists and turns.

MatPat is not law on theories. Far from it.

Quote: sonicbrawler182

MatPat is not law on theories. Far from it.

I, uh, never said that.

Quote: spyrolvr96

Quote: sonicbrawler182

MatPat is not law on theories. Far from it.

I, uh, never said that.

You never said it, but they way you speak of the "FNAF 4 is the bite of '87" theory implies it is the only possible outcome, and as a result, what MatPat says in that video would have to basically be gospel.

There was also your previous posts on him and the fact that you posted the theory only to follow up with implying it can't be wrong, so yeah.

Quote: sonicbrawler182

You never said it, but they way you speak of the "FNAF 4 is the bite of '87" theory implies it is the only possible outcome, and as a result, what MatPat says in that video would have to basically be gospel.

There was also your previous posts on him and the fact that you posted the theory only to follow up with implying it can't be wrong, so yeah.

I honestly have no clue where you are getting any of this from.

I couldn't even stomach finishing the first two minutes of that video... I'm not sure how much of a jerk MatPat was trying to come across as, but he definitely succeeded in doing so.

Quote: Wolfgang

I couldn't even stomach finishing the first two minutes of that video... I'm not sure how much of a jerk MatPat was trying to come across as, but he definitely succeeded in doing so.

He's always been an egotistical braggart. It's nauseating.

Ok, I struggled through 11 minutes of that garbage, and all he says is that scientifically it wouldn't work. As I'm sure you're all aware, Scott's games aren't based on science, they're based on spirituality. If you want to bring science into it, then there's no way anything in the story could happen.

I hate Game Theorists, for personal reasons. However, his reaction to it is hilarious, FNAF 4 is canon, but because his headcanon has been disturbed, he, like any fanboy, throws a complete fit over it.

Also, if it isn't in 1987...


Also, there's this little tidbit of info...

Quote: PwnageFTW

I have a theory for what will be released in Halloween.

So you know the minigame you get in Fnaf 3 when you walk down the hall as the puppet and you get to the end and all the animatronics's souls are free and the balloons rising represent that? Well, as you walk down that same hall, there is kids with animatronic masks we haven't seen before. Maybe there will be another game like Fnaf, and it's in the same world as Fnaf. Scott said it won't branch off of Fnaf on steam, but the teaser says "The End?" So does that signal it will be the same world, but a different company?

bump for those that missed this.

Quote: kardonis

Ok, I struggled through 11 minutes of that garbage, and all he says is that scientifically it wouldn't work. As I'm sure you're all aware, Scott's games aren't based on science, they're based on spirituality. If you want to bring science into it, then there's no way anything in the story could happen.

Yes, the games are spiritual and not scientific, but there's still willing suspension of belief. All that spiritual stuff is like an alternate universe- What would it be like if we had the technology to have walking talking animatronics in the 80's and the ghosts of dead children? But even with that alternate universe thing, it's still implied that the alternate-universe humans are the same as regular, this-universe humans, and not only because it's never stated otherwise. That's why the frontal lobe thing breaks the willing suspension of belief- the protagonists are supposed to be normal humans, and then one goes and acts like a non-normal one.

Besides, if you're going based on this game alone, you can't really say that it's spiritual, since it's all a nightmare, (at least some parts of) which science can explain.

Quote: KnightArtorias

I hate Game Theorists, for personal reasons. However, his reaction to it is hilarious, FNAF 4 is canon, but because his headcanon has been disturbed, he, like any fanboy, throws a complete fit over it.

Oh, how I love people that do this- people who ignore things and make up others to justify hating someone/thing. I rewatched the entire video, and there is absolutely no point where he "throws a fit". There isn't even a point in the video where he mentions his own headcanon.

Hate Game Theory if you want- I honestly couldn't care less. But find actual reasons to, instead of fabricating some.

Ok look, I have a lot of problems with this. First, he said the game's creator was wrong, not over the story or anything with an impact, but because of some minor detail. Something that would be easily overlooked by 99% of the population. Second, he spends eleven whole minutes restating one single fact which really doesn't need to be done and just makes him sound like a jerk. Third, it's pretty clear he's using this for clickbait and to get some free cash from youtube.

It's not like Scott had much of a choice at this point, he mentioned the frontal lobe in the first game, and he really can't take back anything at this point. Even though the bite itself couldn't have removed the lobe, it still appears in the nightmare animatronic.

"willing suspension of belief", uh, ok, sure, whatever you want to say.

Imo, yes scott messed up from a scientific view, but he isn't a brain doctor, and MatPat just made a really lazy video filled with images he found from the internet after doing a 5 minute google search, not actually making a theory, just essentially pulling an HIR and yelling SCIENCE really loud and expecting people to think it's a good video.

Alright, I rewatched the video again-

Quote: kardonis

Ok look, I have a lot of problems with this. First, he said the game's creator was wrong, not over the story or anything with an impact, but because of some minor detail. Something that would be easily overlooked by 99% of the population.

It's not really a minor detail, seeing as it is one of the main events in the series' backstory and the single event that causes the entirety of FNaF 4 to happen.

Quote: [url=http://forum.darkspyro.net/spyro/viewposts.php?topic=106635&post=5689711

Second, he spends eleven whole minutes restating one single fact which really doesn't need to be done and just makes him sound like a jerk.

I don't really see how spending three minutes giving many varied examples on how nearly everything in the game points to it being about the Bite of '87 and then five minutes explaining what actually happens as a result of a frontal lobe injury and showing through multiple, varied ways how it does not fit into the game's story constitutes "eleven whole minutes restating one single fact".

Quote: [url=http://forum.darkspyro.net/spyro/viewposts.php?topic=106635&post=5689711

Third, it's pretty clear he's using this for clickbait and to get some free cash from youtube.

With all of the obvious effort he'd have had to put into research, theorizing and actually making the animations for the video, it's pretty clear that you pulled this out of thin air.

Quote: kardonis

It's not like Scott had much of a choice at this point, he mentioned the frontal lobe in the first game, and he really can't take back anything at this point.

He didn't have a choice? He was forced to go through with the nightmare animatronics idea, instead of one that fit?

Quote: kardonis

Even though the bite itself couldn't have removed the lobe, it still appears in the nightmare animatronic.

I'm not all that sure where you are getting this from. If it's from the minigame that shows the Bite, that's in Atari graphics. It's pretty difficult to show minor details like what part of the head was bitten when you have and area of about 8 by 8 pixels. If you're going to go with that (which has at least some liberty, since there is zero blood), then there wouldn't be any brain injury- the kid would be decapitated.

Quote: kardonis

"willing suspension of belief", uh, ok, sure, whatever you want to say.

Um, you can ignore that if you want, it doesn't make it any less of a thing.

Quote: kardonis

Imo, yes scott messed up from a scientific view, but he isn't a brain doctor

No, he isn't a brain doctor, but he is someone who puts a lot of effort and little details into his games and lore, making this contradictory one stand out moreso because of it.

Once again, MatPat's theory means nothing until more content and details come out for the game. There is evidence to say it is the bite of '87, but also evidence that it may not be.

I enjoy MatPat's videos, but this one was really bad. This FNaF 4 "theory" feels less like an actual game theory and more of a "let's take out the fun of the games by explaining the logistics behind it" kind of video. Let alone explain the logistics in a franchise with haunted robots.

I'm sure Scott knows what he's doing with the story, even if we haven't completely pieced it together just yet. And even if he did make this frontal lobe mistake, you can't really blame him. He puts an insane amount of detail in the series' story, and him glossing over any small thing in the story was bound to happen at some point. But considering he has 3 whole games before this one that are nearly flawless in their little details, it's still pretty impressive how much detail he was still able to put into the games without messing it up.

To be honest, the whole 'frontal lobe' thing was said by Phone Guy, an in-game character, who possibly might not know much about the incident and might have used the wrong term for the part of the brain that got damaged.

Quote: kardonis

Ok look, I have a lot of problems with this. First, he said the game's creator was wrong, not over the story or anything with an impact, but because of some minor detail. Something that would be easily overlooked by 99% of the population. Second, he spends eleven whole minutes restating one single fact which really doesn't need to be done and just makes him sound like a jerk. Third, it's pretty clear he's using this for clickbait and to get some free cash from youtube.

Well said.

I think we've all realized that the "game theory" is utterly pointless and discussing it further is a waste of all our time. Let's move on and talk about the actual game instead of what one guy said about it in a video.

Considering that the kid dies in night six, and then in night 7 fredbear becomes nightmare, I'm thinking that we are playing as a different character, maybe the kids older brother who was responsible. His younger brother now haunts him in his dreams. We can see a hunk of what seems like brain matter in nightmare, that I figure is probably the frontal lobe.

I realized something, nowhere is it said that the animatronic removed the frontal lobe from the victim. It could easily be that they had to remove the frontal lobe with surgery after it got heavily damaged, hence why he's in a hospital.

Boris does an animation on FNAF4~

*Le reads the comments in MatPat's FNaF 4 video*



MATPAT JUST GOT SLAMMED

^ OOOOOH ****!

Does anyone know the crucial detail Scott is mentioning?

Quote: kardonis

Does anyone know the crucial detail Scott is mentioning?

It was said to be something other comments were mentioning. Possible confirmation it isn't actually bite of 87?

Quote: kardonis

Does anyone know the crucial detail Scott is mentioning?

It's a possible theory this is another incident in 1983 at Fredbears or something else either way so long to Mats theory thanks Scott

Quote: pankakesparx456

*Le reads the comments in MatPat's FNaF 4 video*



MATPAT JUST GOT SLAMMED

MatPat also deleted the comment, apparently.

What a hack.

^ OH MY GOD HE DID NOT.

>_________>

There could also be a chance Scott just deleted it because he may have accidentally confirmed something, which is a thing he hates doing with this franchise.

Either way, MatPat is still handling the whole thing terribly. He even made a comment about the theory problems his fans have been constantly mentioning, along with the whole 1983 easter egg:

Quote: MatPat

Some comments to a lot of the big questions on the new Five Nights at Freddy's video. Hope they help clarify this a bit!

- "X Days before the party": This text before each minigame DOESN'T mean the nights featured in the game are all happening before bite shown in the Night 5 minigame. That's only true IF you're assuming time is linear and that each minigame takes place between each night, which is incredibly unlikely. As we've seen in past games, the minigames between nights are UNSTUCK in time, most often FLASHBACKS to events that happened. The pills, IV, and flowers support this assumption that a medical emergency (like the bite) already happened.

- The 1983 date on the TV, yes I was aware of it when writing the episode. That will be more fully addressed in the lore video!

- Phone Guy's comment about "surviving without a frontal lobe": Just because the kid goes limp in the mouth of Fredbear DOESN'T mean he died in that moment. It's highly likely he went into shock, blacked out, etc, from the injury, and was then rushed to the hospital. And the flatline in night 6, yes, it's likely that means the child died in those moments, BUT he still "lived" for a period of time before that -- the time between the bite and his eventual passing. So Phone Guy's comment isn't invalid -- he never specified HOW LONG the bite victim lived or that the victim was still alive, just that there was a period of time where the victim survived without a chunk of brain, which he found surprising.

Bold part is what I'm focused on. He pretty much intentionally disregarded the most crucial detail he was missing. Whether MatPat is making a "lore video" because he forgot this detail intentionally, or unintentionally and is trying to cover it up, it still makes you ask the question of why he even made this video in the first place if he's working on an actual theory.

MatPat leaves out details to make most of his theories sound plausible to those who would be none the wiser. Rosalina Unmasked is probably the biggest example, where he also gets facts flat out wrong and essentially lies, even when his own footage shows how his theories are wrong a lot of the time. He did a similar thing with the "Mario is faster than Sonic" theory.

And no, it was definitely MatPat. He is the only one with any reason to delete it.

Quote: sonicbrawler182

And no, it was definitely MatPat. He is the only one with any reason to delete it.

You mean the only one with the ability to delete it, save for Scott himself.

I know, but I mean that of the two, MatPat is the only one with a reason to delete it. Having the creator of the game his video is examining debunk his theory with the comment that has the most likes and will show up at the top of the page, only tarnishes his credibility as a theorist and the credibility of this theory. And all viewers are gonna see that.

Scott only benefits from his comment as it gets him a lot of publicity and goodwill from the community of FNAF fans (since many were against the theory), and he gets to debunk misinformation about his own creation.

Theory: The fredbear plush is controlled by the puppet or the puppet's spirit.

Explains why the puppet isn't in the location but the toys are as well as mangle and such. He could be locked in the box, trapping the body. The fredbear plush is LITERALLY everywhere, in the house, outside the establishment, hiding in the park, in the sewers, etc. Obviously this couldn't just be an average plush. The puppet possessing it explains the moving eyes, the fact it talks to him, and the line "I will fix you" at the end of night 6. As we all know, in the good ending of F3, we play as the puppet who then frees the golden freddy child, what we presume to be the four bullies, and itself. Could this be the fixing the plush is mentioning? Knowing that because he died in an animatronic it forces him to be stuck on earth in a purgatory state, instead of ascending past.

Quote: kardonis

Theory: The fredbear plush is controlled by the puppet or the puppet's spirit.

Explains why the puppet isn't in the location but the toys are as well as mangle and such. He could be locked in the box, trapping the body. The fredbear plush is LITERALLY everywhere, in the house, outside the establishment, hiding in the park, in the sewers, etc. Obviously this couldn't just be an average plush. The puppet possessing it explains the moving eyes, the fact it talks to him, and the line "I will fix you" at the end of night 6. As we all know, in the good ending of F3, we play as the puppet who then frees the golden freddy child, what we presume to be the four bullies, and itself. Could this be the fixing the plush is mentioning? Knowing that because he died in an animatronic it forces him to be stuck on earth in a purgatory state, instead of ascending past.

That seems like a pretty plausible theory. We'll have to wait and see.

yeah, I'm dying to see what's in the box, and if the halloween update doesn't change F4 at all, then there's gotta be a way to open it now, right????