The FNAF Encyclopedia is BASED (Y'all are just mean) | FNAF Theory
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 มิ.ย. 2024
- Go to strms.net/hellofresh_ryetoast and use code POGHF92199 for my special HelloFresh discount and to support my channel! #ad
2️⃣ have already claimed this exclusive offer!
Check out HelloFresh with this link or code "POGHF92199" to support the channel!
strms.net/hellofresh_ryetoast
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm telling you guys, the encyclopedia is really good and based. yeah there's a couple errors but nothing is so egregious that we don't have to strike out the entire book. besides, it's five nights at freddy's, when is there ever not a mistake of something lol
We Shop Song - LSME • We Shop Song
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get your Toast Stickers!
www.etsy.com/listing/13972606...
Get your own apron!
www.etsy.com/listing/13824021...
Thumbnail art by
/ barbadroid
Here are all my socials and ways to support the channel!
koji.to/RyeToast
Join our growing community on discord!
/ discord
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timestamps:
00:00 What is the FNAF Encyclopedia drama?
02:13 What do people say the FNAF Encyclopedia get wrong/retcon?
10:05 Hello Fresh Ad
11:17 What LORE does the FNAF Encyclopedia give us?
21:24 Recap
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The style of this video is similar to Fuhnaff, Pastra, FusionZGamer, and uhyeah. A large influence on this channel has been Wendigoon, Game Theory, Markiplier, and Dawko.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#fnafsecuritybreach #fivenightsatfreddys #fnaf - เกม
What do you think of the Encyclopedia? Let me know!
Thanks again to HelloFresh for sponsoring today's video strms.net/hellofresh_ryetoast
I think it’s great
So many errors tho...
The bonbon is on the poster far left on fnaf 3 or atleast close enough you showed it as you said it xD
I think that the Encyclopedia is correct. People are being lazy and not admitting their wrong.
I think it can help guide us, but we should be er on the side of caution. Although I really want to see how they are going to handle Michael Afton in the future. By the way does anyone know if they mention phone guy in the book, I have not read it yet.
As a major FNAF lore expert, I can safely tell you that Phantom Foxy's hook hand has gone astray.
Now I can die peacefully knowing Phantom Foxy's hook hand has gone astray.
Thank god I can now safely know that Phantom Foxy's hook hand has gone astray
I’m not convinced, personally I believe that phantom foxy’s hook hand has gone astray.
I can confirm, the hook hand of Phantom Foxy, has gone astray.
a little contriversal, we all know his hook hand has gone astray
as much as I dislike the franchise's direction ever since sister location, I do still approve of their decision of confirming the fact that phantom foxy's hook hand has gone astray
Hate them or love them, you do have to admit that his hook hand has gone astray
I think the hook hand has gone astray
It’s also probably worth pointing out that his hook hand has gone astray
As well as that I can’t believe they finally gave us the definitive proof that his hook did in fact go astray
I don't mean to criticize the book but I firmly believe that it cannot be definitively proven that PF's hook hand has gone astray.
Honestly, an encyclopedia that deliberately leaves out a major character just to avoid shaking things up doesn't seem like much of an encyclopedia to me. Especially when it also locks Vanessa into the least interesting option for her as a character.
Even then, if they were so concerned about the "Game Appearances" thing for Michael, they could've just blanked it out but still fill out the rest of the basic information for Michael Afton.
An encyclopedia is supposed to answer questions, not lead to more questions.
@@LumosVeil Or have "Game Appearances: Five Nights at Freddy's: Sister Location (only known appearance)"; that way it still leaves potential other appearances up to ambiguity.
@Tympest Books I wonder if any of the Venessa specific endings could be considered her TRUE ending. Although I will say, personally the hill ending seems like a fan theory cop-out.
Authors: "Some fans consider this to be the better, more conclusive ending... let's just roll with it..."
Fanbase: "What do you think this game is, Shadow the Hedgehog?"
True but not about Vanessa. Her being Vanny seems pretty obvious
@Vaha Hadziev Incredibly so, I don't understand why people act like it's a mystery.
On an unrelated note, doesn't that Bruce Wayne guy look kinda like Batman?
I think my biggest problem is the inconsistencies PLUS what seems like general lack of care for the production quality of the writing and images. I also don’t understand why so many FNAF AR skinks got dedicated pages, while Michael Afton didn’t get a single one. If this is to be what the franchise is moving towards, from a lore perspective w retcons, it feels like they’re throwing out the baby with the bath water.
I think Micheal was excluded since Scott didn't want to confirm or deny and theories yet
My theory about the FNAF Encyclopedia is that the reason there's so much inconsistencies is because it was written and/or published by Fazbear Entertainment since you can see their logo on every page at the top.
@@clashpigsmk1564 but he did with the Mike trap theory (if I remember correctly)
@@skelebonez1349 To be fair that was more of a required correction to something that could get bad if it got out of hand. People thinking Springtrap was Micheal Afton would make Pizza Sim confusing. He's also done vital corrections before like back when "adult theory" was a thing
@@skelebonez1349 he did. He commented on a game theory video saying that everyone worried about "miketrap" should watch it. In the video matpat said that Michael is not Springtrap.
“His hook hand went astray” is going to be one of those meme lines everyone quotes as a joke now, isn’t it
It's not a meme! It's very serious, I think his hook hand may have gone astray
@@RyeToast I dont know... Do we have definitive proof that Foxy's hook hand has gone astray?
@Hadden Woods Well, the book does clearly state that his hook hand went astray, so I think it's safe to say that his hook hand went astray, lol
So what you're saying is that the hook meme has gone astray?
@@xWoods06x Guys i just checked ingame, and im pretty sure that in Fnaf 3 his hook hand have gone astray!
I am 100% sure that the people who made this book didn't actually play any or at least most of the FNAF games. Many of the descriptions of characters are literally just reworded cutscenes or basic summaries. There's literally no reason that they should've done that. I'm convinced that the retcons and confirmations are completely accidental
I totally agree with you, there was a lack of proper investigation and it's just plain text thrown around, with different ideas.
The TH-camr NotRealNameNotAtAll has a great video on the subject
@@samlewis6487 yeah I have watch it. I'm subscribe to it. I really like how it's explained
So scott never played his own game?
@@Youmu_Konpaku_ I don’t think Scott was even involved in the book
I'll give the book writers some slack, maybe their hook hand went astray or smth 🤨
Maybe ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I really was curious if Foxy's hook hand went astray in FNAF 3, I'm glad they cleared it up in the book
Although I agree it would confirm or deconfirm a lot of lore adding Micheal to the book, I think he really should’ve been included and maybe they could have given a reason why his data file was missing in order to preserve it. All in all this book isn’t terrible and I hope we get updated versions just like the Freddy Files. Great video as always rye!
Honestly I totally agree. A Michael page with a redacted data file would be perfect
Just give us a redacted or censor bar, such an easy fix
@@RyeToast Maybe it's just me, but I keep wondering about the encyclopedia in terms of the meta of the franchise. So if we know that fazbear entertainment is building games and stuff to try and control the narrative, could it be possible that something like this encylopedia is just another PR tool to try and control the narrative? From that standpoint some of the decisions like keeping Michael out would make more sense to me and could actually be a compelling story beat if you use the reasoning for why as part of a big reveal later on. But that's probably just me overthinking haha.
@@skilanortiz7080 I used that theory as a Joke unknowingly, but considering this book references the books it is probably not canon
My friends and I always avoided the Mangle He/She confusion by always referring to Mangle as an it. Works pretty well since I didn’t even know what it was. It was always just an abomination.
I usually use it or they since they're a robot
I use they, as the Main Head and the Endo Head act independently
I like calling Mangle *"it"* because it just makes it oddly more menacing to me
I call the main head a girl and the Endo head a boy
I think "It" usually works for Singular Entity that's non living.
While "They" works for Plural Entities that are living.
But because they both lack a second option, you're stuck with incomplete pronouns.
I think "They" is used more, because it's more respectful to refer to someone as Plural instead of stating they're unalive or an object.
While calling someone an "It" might be seen as negative.
But in Mangle's case, it's probably more sensible to alternative between "He/She" tha "It/they".
Since Mangle is an Animatronic, but possessed by a Spirit as well. So Mangle Unalive, but Alive at the same.
However, i don't think people should worry too much. Mangle is a fictional character anyway, call Mangle whatever you want.
I always assumed that the Charlie page intentionally lies as to not spoil the book series outright.
that's probably what they did and we're just looking too deep into it. as always
@@cooki1875 It just makes the most sense.
Then....shouldn't Charlie's page(s) have been omitted if they were worried about spoilers like with Michael, Cassidy/TOYSNHK, and Fredbear?
Or, people shouldn't get this encyclopedia if they were worried about spoilers?
Than its not a good encyclopedia
Then it's against the purpose of an Encyclopedia itself
If a fan reads it and doesn't know it wrong then he would think its true
It's totally bad
Whatever lore inconsistencies there are, my only gripe with it is some of the art.
LadyFiszi's art is just... Well, this fandom has spectacular artists out there, folks like Sian for example, who also has done official artwork, her style is beautiful, it goes for a more realistic look that really breathes an unnatural life into these animatronics... and yet all she gets to do is art for a (admittedly really cool) Springtrap mug while for the book we get the Elizabeth with legs starting from where her knees should be.
Heck, give us the art from the last two graphic novels, it's just as cartoony and it looks amazing. I know that, for some, this is more of a matter of opinion than anything, which is why I say it's a minor gripe, but still.
I absolutely loath the first graphic novel art style of FNAF so much. They look so generic and just.. So not in tune with the vibe of FNAF, where's you got stuff like Sonic IDW comics that look good and match the vibe of the franchise. I just. Ugh, I don't like dogging on people's art but LadyFiszi and Pinky’s art is just... I can’t. You’d think FNAF would be able to hire better artists to make consistent art by now instead of just a mismatch of game screenshots and art. It reads as disorganized.
@@LumosVeil I hate how cartoon-y everything is, like with Security breach. I can't stand the models for the humans, you have these hyper realistic robots and then these crappy models that look like they're from the blander, corporate version of arcane.
To me, the quasi-absence of original art and the pretty consistent errors make it look SOOO much like an editor-only "character guide" like you get for popular mangas... You know, the kind that give blood type and horoscope sign to characters in universes where that doesn't mean anything, and do while hypothesises that have nothing to do or go directly against the original work's lore and plot points.
All that to say... I understand that this is, apparently, a genuine official book that can be used as source material... but it doesn't feel like it at all.
Mans putting his cats to sleep with fnaf lore
Same tho lol
One thing that doesn't get talked about enough is the Fazbear corporate cover up. According to Tape Girl, the FNAF games (in whatever form they take in universe) are specifically there to make light of true events. FNAF VR basically says that outright. If this book isn't as shit as it seems, and I am still not convinced this book is not shit, then this might be a major stepping stone in retconning/correcting the lore either to what Fazcorp wants, or what they are trying to cover up. Just some food for thought.
That would be a interesting angle to take the book, sorta like the security logbook where it was clearly changed by someone to give us bits of confirmation or new lore. I don't think it's the case for this book since it include Security Breach and UCN stuff and that's not part of the "games within games" part of the series
@@TheWizardMus oh I agree with you. Just suggesting an alternative take.
it’s unclear whether any of the fnaf games are the games mentioned in help wanted, because there is a specific mention that the creator died before finishing the fourth. so whether or not this is really referring to fnaf 1 2 and 3 or not isnt really obvious. i know it’s really stupid and weird but personally i don’t think that line really means that the games are literal games
I think the Book is written probably from the Fazbear perspective. Although i know for certain the book is just bad and Lazy.
But i think you can kind of see it as an attempt by them for another cover up. They can't just outrightly go out and poke fun at themselves to divert suspicion. That would look too obvious.
So they created an encyclopaedia to somewhat address some of the hypothetical events that allegedly took place in some of their restaurants. While they can still avoid mentioning any crude details.
@@theopendoorev Your last sentence is definitely not true. There are in-universe games, as explicitly stated in Tape 13, "Fazbear Entertainment hired the game developer. Those indie games were designed to conceal and make light of what happened."
As I said before, what I said is true *regardless of the form they take in universe*. I specifically called that out because regardless of if our games match the in-universe games, what I said still holds.
Personally, I think the book story basically explains why FNAF VR calls the first 3 modes "FNAF 1," "FNAF 2," and "FNAF 3," but the other modes are more loosely based on the stories, locations, and characters. The ones that finished development in-universe are recreated basically 1-to-1 but the others are not. After all, Scott originally considered 3 the end of the series, before changing his mind. This kind of legitimizes that idea in a new context.
This book also confirms that the crying child's name is in fact The Crying Child, since both the blob and burntrap are listed as having 'not cannon' names but The Crying Child isn't.
Also, I'm so relieved to hear that Phantom Foxy's hook hand has gone astray.
That doesn't mean that is the actual name of the character, that just means its an official title for them. Sure it doesn't say his name is Evan Afton, but that doesn't mean that isn't his name and we already know even off of the games alone that he is an Afton at the very least.
william afton really doomed this kid from the beginning. “oh this is my eldest michael, my daughter elizabeth, and our youngest, the crying child. he never stops sobbing so we just encouraged it.”
man. no wonder this kid was constantly bullied.
@@ElizaArtz Well yeah, we know he's an Afton but we don't know what his first name is.
@@theblasphemousgamer4888 The books say his name is 'Evan'. That's the best we have until the games include it or reveal his name as something else.
@@ElizaArtz wait, which book says his name?
I just find it kinda amusing that, just like how SB feels like it was never play tested, this book feels like it wasn't proof read
Best name for The Blob is Spaghetti Freddy. It's not an opinion, it's a fact.
I personally think the SAVEHIM retcon was that the child was originally going to be Sammy Emily, so that the difference between the Silver Eyes trilogy and the game timelines started with which twin was killed, but then Scott realised it was so much easier to stick to Charlotte, and let Sammy disappear.
Sammy Emily is likely swapped with Charlie to be in the Springtrap/Burntrap/shadow bonnie role.
Oh yea i forgot about sammy
What's weird is that Sammy and Charlie showed up in fnaf4 as the plushtrap kid and the girl playing with beakless toy chica. They existed before the novels...
FUCK>>>>.dfjeiofji0
I had a horrible realization. Sammy Emily is still the "Save Him" victim, but... Henry Emily killed him after realizing he went to Freddys and couldn't get inside of the building. Fnaf PS was trolling the fuck out of us. It was showing us the Twins dying at Freddys. Sammy was wearing a blue shirt and Charlie was wearing a red shirt. Scott trolled us!!! He purposely stacked Sammy and Charlie together in the PS ending to make it more obvious that they were different kids wearing differently colored clothes.
Sammy was the "one you shouldn't have killed." Charlie did the UCN for her brother and she (the fnaf4 piece of her) possessed GF (as Nightmare/Shadow Freddy). In Midnight Motorist, William Afton broke Sammy out of the house and buried himself in Henry's backyard to avoid getting rained on. Henry killed Sammy at Fazbears and tried to frame William Afton for it in "Fruity Maze", the minigame that took place after "Save Him' before William Afton dug himself out of the hole.
I highly doubt the Emilys were even a concept back in FNAF 2, but by the time of the Silver Eyes, I can probably see it.
In the SAVE THEM minigame, the voice saying SAVE THEM is supposedly Charlotte speaking. Wouldn't it make sense for the voice in SAVE HIM to be Charlotte as well? Him referring to Sammy or something? Like, her last thought is saving her brother from the same fate. Causing her to cling to life long enough for the puppet to lay over her so she could come back? This wouldn't make sense since the voice is talling while Charlotte is still alive but it's a cool headcannon that gives Sammy some reason to exist.
On the topic of mangle, people don’t like the use of only male pronouns for her because it’s incorrect, but because it goes against a gag that has been around for him since 2, which shows that someone with decent knowledge of the brand didn’t write (at least some) of this book.
That's totally fair, although I'm surprised it slipped through review
Its the same problem with funtime foxy and lolbit they also called them only he/him like they were to lazy to search up the informatioms about them because for exsample lolbit had a female pronounce before and now its looks like they dont give a fck and just gave her a male only pronounce
Book: *confirms Mangle, FF and Lolbit as males*.
Fans with their huge headcanons: ah shit, no, that's impossible, i really love fnaf canon where they all are nonbinary-terminator-halfmoon-gigachad-genderfluids (and that's 100% not my personal headcanon, it's really fnaf canon, Scott have said so but i've lost his post on freddit about that topic, sorry), so it's error in the book and so the book is bad!!!!!!!!!
(I love this sort of mentality that if something contradicts ur thoughts about fnaf lore then it 100% an error in book and not a confirmation that u are actually wrong about fnaf lore).
@@threedi8263 🤡🤡
@@threedi8263 no the problem is this book isnt even close to confirm them as males because scott did not wrote this book thats the first point
and the scond point is scott would make half of the community upset if he would wrote this book because there are many people that see them as girls and making them male would make the people upset thats why its imposible that they confirmed their genders and it still doesnt make any sense because lolbit and funtimefoxy had female pronounce aswell and beyond that bonbon was allways reffered ro a he/him and the book just calls him a girl out of nowhere and mangle is confimred as a "yes" and still they gave her/him male pronounce only i think you dont understand the problem dont you?
The way I see it, a single character encyclopedia doesn't hold enough weight in the franchise to make big sweeping retcons. Especially not one that considers non-canon alternate skins for characters from the AR game important enough to include. Now, if these changes are consistently present in main series games moving forward, then sure! I'll go along with it. But every book up to this point has had questionable levels of canon and I think we'd be best off doing what we've done with all the books beforehand and use it as a supplement for theorycrafting, but not definitive evidence of retcons being made.
Also, considering what other straight-up errors this book managed to get published with, I'm more prone to believing that this whole encyclopedia is just a mess of misinformation. There's been so much questionable quality control with just about everything FNAF ever since Security Breach that I don't really know what's worth trusting anymore.
But I loved the video regardless of the fact I disagree! I think it's always important to have community voices speaking on multiple sides of an argument!
Dude how are your cats so chill? Mine want off my lap if I move even slightly.
Every cat is different. I actually have three cats but my third HATES being held so she isn't in the videos
time to drop everything I'm doing and grab my apron
Let's gooo
Spoon
*opens secret stash of dough *
Wait what if I am holding my dog would I drop him?
I think this book is best taken with a grain of salt. It seems weird (almost lazy) to confirm / de-comfirm so much, especially when there is so much value in theory crafting.
My biggest problem is with the Crying Child's page. I agree that Michael is the protagonist of FNAF 4. The mini-game bedroom and main game bedroom are absolutely not the same as the encyclopedia suggests. Crying Child is also neglected from the happiest day from FNAF 3 or from any of the appearances of Golden Freddy.
my only issue with michael being the fnaf 4 protagonist is that he would be really short. he barely comes up to the doorknobs in the room
@@Lavender_Fox that's something I never thought about
@@Lavender_Foxfnaf 4 gameplay is obviously a dream just not the Crying Child’s. We hear the Fnaf 1 audio during the night and the gameplay mirrors fnaf 1. So one can assume Micheal is having these nightmares around the time of working at Fnaf 1 as he is ridden with guilt about killing his brother.
@@Lavender_Foxhis is also confirmed in the logbook as when the page asks the reader to draw their recent dreams Mike draws Nightmare Fredbear. And since this is a Freddy Fazbears pizza logbook and it asks the reader to draw RECENT dreams it is confirmed the Nightmares happen during Fnaf 1.
@@variangaming8559 ok but short mike
I bought the book a few weeks ago at Barnes and Noble. At first, I was let down by the big inconsistencies, lack of characters, and just poor quality control and effort put into it (to me, it almost felt like it was made to pump out a new book for money), but I was able to get enjoyment out of the book with the information it presented.
But what really caught me off guard was when you brought up Shadow Balloon Boy and Shadow Puppet. And just how straight to the point the book presents the Funtimes’ true nature. Awesome video.
Also, Phone Guy, Phone Dude, and Tape Girl are nowhere to be found.
I'm cautious to trust this book or use it to confirm anything because with all of the errors or inconsistencies it gives me the feeling that this was just written by some intern or employee that doesn't have a deep knowledge about the lore (especially with the final line in FNAF 4 being a different colour)
Its stupid how the Bite victim is presented as in specificly The Happiest day Birthday boy from fnaf 3 but the book also informs us that he never appeared in fnaf 3.
There's one thing that this book just didn't clarify for me, and I'm really disappointed they didn't touch on this...
Did Foxy's hook hand go astray?
That’s an interesting take but we should keep in mind that in FNAF3, Phantom Foxy’s hook hand has gone astray.
I'm no expert but I'm starting to worry that Phantom Foxy's hook hand has gone astray. And if that's not bad enough, I'm pretty sure his hook hand has gone astray.
Honestly, the book is a mess but that's doesn't mean it's to be dismissed entirely... which appears to be the thing FNAF has become in general haha
So yes you are indeed correct
Honestly the biggest thing I've learned here is that his hook hand has gone astray
I think it's entirely possible that the hook hand has gone astray
@@RyeToast I'm so happy. The one lore question had about fnaf 3 was if foxys hook hand has gone astray
17:22 Easily my favourite moment from the video
Incredible job with analysing new Encyclopedia, I like the points you make and I wonder how it'll affect your future theories... And it's a pleasure to create thumbnails for you!
You make the thumbnails for his videos? Cool!
@@seanwood2455 yeee, it's real good to work with them, such a wonderful person
The creator states something about his franchise that doesn't match what community have being theorizing
Most of the community: "Dude, what you said is wrong"
the creator did not write this book. this book was likely written by scholastic employees who are not involved in fnaf at all.
I don't know what to make of it either. Part of me WANTS there to be a huge lore dump just to put certain debates to rest. On the other hand, it's always fun to piece something together and be rewarded with a sense of satisfaction when it turns out to be right. All we need to know is are all the pieces truly available for us to put together. If not, we have a problem.
Another great vid, Rye!
P.S. Thanks for including your kitties in your vids! Such sweet ball of fwuff!
Thank you so much for clearing it up! I thought I noticed Foxy's hook had gone astray and now I know for sure that Foxy's hook has indeed gone astray.
I think we should look at some of these inaccuracies in a lens of "What does it mean if this is true", and go from there about whether or not we want to believe it. If we look at what it would imply and it doesn't make any sense, then it might be an error. But if we look at something - like CC only being in FNAF4 - and there is a way for it to make sense and it's fits compellingly with stuff we already have, then it might be intentional/a retcon. Basically using the info we can trust as context for what info in this book is good to use.
Totally fair. And if it doesn't directly contradict the games, maybe our theories were wrong
@@RyeToast Exactly. Some of these things people are upset about feel less like they're upset about it being wrong and more upset that because they don't want to critically re-evaluate the franchise, even if some of these things - again, like CC being ONLY in 4 - could provide a really interesting new take on the games.
I don’t think I will EVER trust a character encyclopedia. It seems whenever one is made, regardless of what franchise, it’s chocked full of inaccuracies.
It was made by the creators of FNAF
I love this book!
It confirmed once and for all that Mike isn’t real. It was all just Henry the entire time!
Lol I hope not
@@RyeToast clearly Henry built a robot clone of himself using FAZ goo and that’s who we play as in most of the games
@@tomfoolery6211 if I had a nickel for every time I heard that today…
Because Of Micheal Afton being excluded from the book…..You are basically right about there never being a Micheal Afton.
@@justinbuergi9867 facts
For the whole "Crying Child is the protagonist of FNAF 4" part, that has been controversial in the community, at least from the time of the Logbook. The Crying Child is still probably the protagonist of FNAF 4, regardless of what this new book says. Hospital equipment can sometimes appear in the room, which implies that the protagonist has suffered an injury, and is in a hospital. These items wouldn't be there if it was Micheal, since he wasn't hurt.
(And for the FNAF 1 bits, they were probably parts of the "everything is a dream" plotline that Scott originally had, but scrapped due to fear of community backlash.)
Totally agree, I think the evidence proving the crying child is way more than Michael and makes sense to the story of fnaf4 anyway (would be super weird to let us play as a different child in cutscenes).
How would BV know about the hospital equipment if he was in a coma? Also just because Micheal wasn't injured dosen't mean he didn't SEE the hospital equipment.
@@gotem2546 we never actually got confirmation that the Bite Victim was in a coma. All we know is that they were in a hospital. It was never said that they were in a coma.
Plus, it would be kind of weird if Micheal had visions of flowers, pills, and a IV in his room. He wouldn't be the one that would have that stuff next to his bed, but the BV would
@@tinaherr3856 could be visiting and being guilty see the flowers and iv drips and pills how would crying child know about phone guys voice being reversed in FNAF 4 if it wasn't Micheal Afton and Micheal still wrote an actual image of nightmare fredbear in the logbook in his red pen in dreams you've been having lately page flatline at the end of FNAF 4 also infers cc has died or hes putting himself in crying child's shoes in his dream
@@Deadhead-kq4hr well, there are theories that Micheal also encountered the Nightmares, or an equivalent of them, but in the form of illusion discs. There is a precedent for this, like in The Twisted Ones books, where Afton puts illusion discs on animitronics, creating terrifying hallucinations. Heck, Nightmare himself is even on the cover of that book.
Big man getting a big sponsorship! That aside, chonk catto is cute and the video is wonderful as always!
Thank you!
We all love this cat king-
Same
@@RyeToast I’m talking about you good sir- we all love you! Hugs and love for you :>
8:16
I think they just didn't want to spoil the big twist of the trilogy that she's a robot
And give the surface story of the novels
I feel like the encyclopedia is the idea of Fazbear entertainment covering there tracks in some sort of way and made mistakes in the encyclopedia il
So it probably was intentional for the book to be wrong
i had this same thought!!!!
I agree! I imagine it's a kind-of in-world book/guide put together from someone's specific view. I think there are errors/changes that are intentional and that show a specific viewpoint. The lack of a certain character feels like it points in that direction.
That's the dumbest possible interpretation. Also, even if it's stupid and wrong on purpose doesn't make it any less stupid and wrong
I have written a theory that revolves around Fazbear Entertainment covering things up. I completely agree. I feel like the misinfo could well be a factor. We already know they pulled an 'Elaborate cover up' during Help Wanted.
@@cenobittten Yes, but that game has lore within the game itself hinting that it was a coverup. I feel like if this was meant to be something made in-universe, it would've had hints to it.
Unless you can find hints, it's not really much of a theory. Just an explanation/excuse for any mistakes.
14:04 they were named "shadows" since FNaF 3 in the game files I believe, the wiki named them like that for a while at this point, far before this book.
It's similar to how everyone called JayJay "Balloon Girl" before the release of FNaF World, even if she was named JayJay since FNaF 2 in the game files.🎈
13:49 THANK YOU. As soon as I saw him, I too wanted 10 of them. Instantly huggable and cherishable
These editing mistakes tell me that this book was somewhat rushed, or that the publishers didn't give it the attention the should have (likely knowing it would sell well due to the franchise connections).
As an editor, I know how many rigorous checks books typically go through. The editing mistakes really suggest something went awry there.
Not enough people say it, so I will!!! Thank you for the wonderful cat content :D
Love seeing the fluffy babies so relaxed and comfortable while listening to lore. It's obvious they love you a lot ^-^
I will second this opinion
Sometimes I have to rewind the video cause I get distracted by the fluffy baby 😅
It's just a cat mate. No need to do hoo haa about it.
Leaving Michael out jut because of one line would be stupid as hell. They could've just put "Sister Location, ?" Or something and it would have been fine.
If you read over Elizabeth Afton's page, there's a part that says "There are hints that _Michael_ was following his father's instructions when he went to Circus Baby's Entertainment and Rental--William evidently didn't intend his daughter to fall victim to Circus Baby." Which makes it all the more *weird* that Michael doesn't have a page when he's literally mentioned by NAME.
Plot twist: Foxy’s hook hand was actually just an illusion disk
Fnaf fans complaining about fnaf having inconstant lore is the wildest thing I have heard all day.
Fr lol. Like yeah, it always has been and will be
To be fair Fnaf has been going on for so long and it seems like we are in a section of the story at this point that is beyond the first portion of the series, I feel like they could just come out and reveal stuff about the story told from the first 6 games. Michael isnt part of the story anymore (as far as we can tell I guess) to confirming what games he's in and what things like Fnaf 1 Chika being in Fnaf 3 means shouldnt be that big of an issue anymore compared to the story of Gregory and the Pizzaplex
The only lore I’ve ever been personally concerned about was the status of Foxy’s hook hand. Now that I have been made aware that it has gone astray, I can finally rest easy.
Surely Foxy's hook hand hasn't gone astray???
Really my only problem with the Encyclopedia is that it's missing Michael and the missing kids. Like they have every AR skin but not all of the important characters. I don't expect a lot to be revealed about them in the book as I'm pretty sure Scott stated that he doesn't want any major lore dumps to exist outside of the games (which he kinda broke that rule with the silver eyes trilogy but whatever) but at least a page talking about them even if it was just surface level stuff would've been nice.
Unless I missed it, I was surprised you didn't go over what was the biggest reveal to me: Henry. They make the Charlotte page say Charlotte Emily, but they specifically use just Henry. They then say that his name is Henry Emily in the books. But if his name was really Henry Emily, why wouldn't the page be titled that, and why wouldn't they call out the name in the books like that? There could be the arguement that we never get his last name revealed in the games, but we never get the reveal for Charlotte's last name in the games either. But they use Charlotte Emily for her. But then, why would their last names be different? I propose that sometime after the death of Charlotte, Henry changes his last name, maybe to not be connected to the bad press of Fredbear's Family Diner. Whatever it was changed to could be a huge hint or reveal in the future. This would also mean that Charlotte dies an Emily, but Henry doesn't continue to live as one.
or in the game continuity, Emily is Charlotte's middle name and they both have a different surname.
Based does not mean what you think it means.
i own the fnaf ultimate guide and just think its a better encyclopedia of the franchise up until special delivery. i has a section in each chapter for theories about the games and has a different section discussing the books and their relevance to canon. i just think the ultimate guide was done better because it properly put together almost everything while paying homage to fan theories and everything
I'm honestly surprised someone doesn't hate the book.
The idea that the animatronics have a gender identity is ridiculous. They're inanimate objects and their "gender" (which, when divorced from sex is a purely arbitrary and superficial description) would be dictated by whoever owns them. Foxy could be "male" in one instance and "female" in another because the restaurant owners decided it. The gender identity is clearly not decided by the spirit animating the animatronic given golden Freddy is inarguably a "he" but is possessed by Cassidy
The way I was literally in the car half an hour ago thinking about how I haven't watched Rye in a little and now here we are, manifestation everyone 😌
Okay admittedly I have ragged on the book a wee bit since its release but some of the lines are genuinely quite witty and fun. There's plenty to like about this book I'm sure.
It's totally valid to like it! And totally valid to not like it and rag on it! As long as both groups don't attack each other
@@RyeToast oh yeah absolutely I'm not going around calling people idiots for liking it or being one of those weirdos who attacked Dawko over it.
Legit question, when do people want answers to be revealed? At what point does Scott or whoever's in charge just clarify the missing few bits of classic FNAF lore? Surely it has to happen eventually
I think it comes down to which answers. Personally I would love a few really cryptic things to be clarified on, or a game that takes place super early on in the franchise. Anything more than that I think would give us too much info
I dont really understand the hate on the book. It gives us solid information without ruining the mystery
For real! A perfect nudge in the right direction
@@RyeToast besides if the book had given us all the answers loads off theory channels would suffer
@@c0p962 MatPat's channels?
@@AUSans101 he references the book in his last FNAF video using it with his ideal timeline.
I would get keeping information elusive, but throwing in factually inaccurate segments that go against deep lore and surface level facts that are already 100% known.
Already people are kinda cherry picking info from the book for theories.
your cats always look so comfortable and chill to be there in your videos😭❤
I understand the idea of not wanting to include Michael Afton for fear of confirming/de-confirming too much, but I think there are definite work arounds, for example, just having the game appearances relabeled to "known game appearances" would instantly solve that problem, that way it could list just Sister Location without being inaccurate or acting as any kind of deconfirm.
I feel like the main problem with using it to say "this proves this" or "deconfirms that" is that when the inconsistencies are such as they are, calling something else a "confirmation" seems kinda... loose, after establishing ways in which this can't be trusted as a source.
I alwas thought William took a game design discarded from the game codes to use as his form in help wanted. Never saw it as a real costume he used on the past.
That cat is so cute :D it looks like my cat's grown-up version
All cats are cute!
Every video that has a cat in the lap is the best video on TH-cam. Fight me.
My only issues with the book are that the appearances are wrong for some characters, and it just makes things confusing like crying child isn’t listed in fnaf 3 so that could mean that he isn’t in happiest day or it’s just an error. It’s just a bit confusing. I like the way you talk about mangles gender. Also there was a theory that yendo is a version of golden Freddy, essentially it’s like golden Freddy takes the form that the other missing kids are in. He’s withered in fnaf 2 like the other animatronics are but then he’s fixed in the future? If he’s a ghost then he could just change his form and then look like yendo. Anyway great video defending the book
I appreciate your objective look at the Encyclopedia, and it does give a lot of interesting insights.
As a sidenote, I've seen theories that propose that Mangle is actually two animatronics in one, thus being the reason why Mangle is called "he" yet appears in Ladies' Night. FNAF AR gave Mangle voicelines in which Mangle uses "we" as if being more than one person. I think that could then line up with the fact that Phantom Mangle and Nightmare Mangle are only ever refered to as "he" perhaps because those two are just singular entities based off the actual Mangle, who is two animatronics. It's hard to say for sure, but I don't see that option considered too often.
If William possesses the blob, I’m gonna call him Gigawilly
On the crying child thing. It is possible since its a dream or nightmare that Michael is imagining himself as his younger bother. This would make the crying child the narrative body you play as while for lore reason it is Michael's dream.
Imagine FNAF was a digital media where an incorrect text colour could be corrected in a patch so fans don't get hung up on a non-clue, which is something Scott dislikes so all would benefit.
I feel like, at least from my perspective: if one piece of information is wrong, then who's to say that the newly introduced info isn't wrong too? Poor quality control can lead to unnecessary or outright incorrect lore bites. The contradictions and errors make the entire book feel nullified - the weakest link breaks the chain, y'know?
When RyeToast says “So, why did they axe Bonnie?” in response to Burntrap being made of a Spring-bonnie suit, (or the same one in FnaF3) along with the Bonnie mystery being brought up, it feels like the Encyclopedia is implying that Monty did it out of personal maliciousness.
They could’ve just written Unknown in Michael’s game appearances. I don’t think it’s a good enough reason not to include him. There are probably kids who picked up the book, don’t care what games Michael’s in, and now aren’t even sure he exists.
The crying child one is probably not an error. It's simple, both CC and Michael had the FNAF 4 nightmares. How would they have the exact same nightmares? There could be more than one explanation, but one could be that some time after killing him, Michael gets haunted by CC and he makes him have the same nightmares that he had, similar to how Cassidy keeps Afton in an endless nightmare in UCN (except this one isn't endless and CC ends up forgiving Mike)
plus if it was CC's only, why wasn't there a nightmare spring bonnie? surely he would have seen his dad get into the suit.
Or Micheal Afton is seeing himself as crying child in his dream
@@Deadhead-kq4hr true
Michael Afton's game appearances should just read " *redacted* "
With the new Crying Child being the fnaf 4 protag I just now assume that the fnaf 4 nightmares are just what he experiences when he's in golden freddy, reliving his nightmare over and over, the fnaf 1 call just coming from what he heard when he was golden freddy during that time.
Saying a Cassidy entry would confirm or deconfirm too much is a good reminder of why I stopped thinking answers would ever come. Any other IP likes to answer big questions now and then. FNAF is just a turkey leg being dangled in front of you on a treadmill. It's much more profitable to keep the questions up than to give a confirmation and get a solid story out like anything else would have done years later.
19:34 you forgot Phone Guy and Casette/Tape Girl.
Edit: also the Phone Dude (the guy from FNAF 3 before the recorded tapes come) but no one really cares about him
04:57 I was replaying FNaF World the other day, and noticed Adventure Phantom Foxy's hook hand was astry too; I point this out because Phantom Freddy's right leg only goes down to the knee, whereas Adventure Phantom Freddy's right leg is perfectly fine.
Interesting. I wonder if it can tell us that whether or not his hook hand has gone astray
For FNAF4, main character doesn’t necessarily = player character
2:42 when I read that I took that as confirmation that we were playing as the Crying Child because I thought it was just a debate as to who we were playing as
Has anyone ever wondered if confirming the Crying Child to be the FNAF 4 player confirms Mikevictim? Or is everybody still against that theory though this book very likely could have confirmed it.
My problem was purely the inconsistent and oddly designed art throughout the pages. That was enough for my brain to dismiss the book as a whole. It did not look official. It looked like a cheap fan-made product
Who wins:
The Entire FNAF Community
VS
A single book
I also do like to point out that a lotta the stuff we claim to know is based on just speculation like “Evan”
Like, we never actually had confirmation until this encyclopaedia that Charlotte is actually Henry/HRY223's daughter's name in the game verse, because he calls out Elizabeth by name, but his daughter/the Puppet. They could have had different names.
I just love the thumbnail, it's so funny
Right? BarBADroid is a godsend
I respect your opinion on the encyclopedia. I don’t like it but people are allowed to like it.
I still refuse to believe plushtrap was a real doll
How would Mike have seen scraptrap to imagine it if he wasn't already a post FNAF 3 adult
Everyone thinks that there theories or anything didn't contradict the games story and they go crazy and get upset over it. It doesn't mean the games story is wrong it just means your theory didn't evolve.
Hear me out....
What if the encyclopedia isn't wrong but we are...
*Insert the rock rising his eyebrow meme
That's what I tried to delve into in that first little section, explaining that if something in the book seems wrong we could have been wrong all along
I actually liked this book except for the part that mikes not in it. And twisted Chika is weird
My first thought was "oh my god, he has a cat..."
I love your cat
In my eyes, the book is correct to state that The Crying Child is the main character of FNAF 4 as it's his story being told to us in between the nights, just because he's the main character doesn't necessarily mean he's the player character after all.
Fnaf aside, how big is your cat? Is it a massive cat, or are you dwarf? This is the real lore I need to know about.
He's a big boy lol. Not even overweight, just big.
@@RyeToast wonderful. I am in awe at the size of such an absolute unit. Thank you so much.
Eyyy, another any pronouns user!
And honestly, the one big major error i dislike about this book (other than the fnaf AR skins, i totally agree that if they replaced those with fnaf world characters i wouldve been way happier) is the fact that it says that the crying child is the main character in fnaf 4 and not micheal, since ive been around the fnaf fandom for a while, when fnaf 4 came out, EVERYONE thought that the crying child was the one we were playing as but that THEN got corrected by the log book, so are they retconning a retcon? It doesnt make sense to me, its just a blatant error that makes me think that i shouldnt trust a thing from this book, even though it DOES bring some good info
also any pronouns here! high five
@@yumijaworscy6473 EYYYYY UP TOP 🙏🌟
Maybe this book is like Help Wanted and it is like Fazbeat telling a different story to make people forget or ignore the real one? 🤔🤔
@@UnderworldsHeiress i think the existence of the Charlotte emily and burntrap pages disprove that, since the william page shows pics from security breach which we know isnt an in-universe game, and fazbear entertainment would bury the hell out of Charlottes existence
Good shot though! The weirdly worded line from DDs entry kinda pointed towards that
मैं, उह, ठीक ऐ ब्रो पसंद मस्त मेरा अनुमान ऐ?
You're telling me Phantom Foxy's hook hand has gone astray?
just wanted to drop a comment here that it’s been really incredible to watch this channel grow from like 5,000 subscribers to almost 100,000!!we’re proud of you!! keep up the great work! :D