"What is seen in shadows can be easily misunderstood in the mind of a child"

[Dabo =]]

Out of all of the hints that Scott gave us, I found a way to connect this one to the games the easiest.

Remember the post-night 2 minigames where you see the shadows of the animatronics on the stage, but the animatronics themselves are off camera? The scenario of the minigame near the end: the crying child is tasked with getting past "them" to find help, but when you (as the player) direct the child a few steps towards the shadows, the man in the Fredbear suit appears on screen at the same time as the crying child lies down under the table. "Tomorrow is another day," you are told.

Now, the things that I'm connecting with Scott's hint are:
1. The crying child
2. The the animatronics visible as shadows onscreen
3. The child failing to get past the shadows mentioned above

What do these connections mean? Well, it's possible that the crying child could have easily misunderstood what he was seeing when he saw the animatronics "in shadows". After all, trying to go to that area in the mingames at anytime besides the specific scenario above will cause a message to appear, saying "NO! Don't you remember what you saw?" etcetera. This voice comes from what we can assume is our "Phsycic Friend, Fredbear" and he seems to be in our minds, controlling our actions indirectly (since we can't progress in the minigames unless we do what he says), so I begin to wonder if he knows what is in our mind (as the crying child). What could the crying child have possibly misunderstood what exactly was happening from looking at the shadows of the animatronics?

I... actually am not sure. But hey, this IS a discussion, right? I'd like to hear what you think, you brilliant theorists!

[ExoticCrystal]

that was long but a very good and complicated theory.

[tloyc2017]

I'm under the impression that he's scared of the restaurant in general, not the animatronics. After all... why would you want to go deeper into a place that you saw people get murdered in?

Let that sink in for a second.

Yes, I know, MatPat essentially copyrighted that theory, I don't care, it makes the most sense.

This is a good theory, but regardless, I think it's... eeh.

Also.

Originally posted by draco:

that was long but a very good and complicated theory.

This isn't long. This is short, all things considered.

[potrice-killer]

Originally posted by Dabogon:

Out of all of the hints that Scott gave us, I found a way to connect this one to the games the easiest.

Remember the post-night 2 minigames where you see the shadows of the animatronics on the stage, but the animatronics themselves are off camera? The scenario of the minigame near the end: the crying child is tasked with getting past "them" to find help, but when you (as the player) direct the child a few steps towards the shadows, the man in the Fredbear suit appears on screen at the same time as the crying child lies down under the table. "Tomorrow is another day," you are told.

Now, the things that I'm connecting with Scott's hint are:
1. The crying child
2. The the animatronics visible as shadows onscreen
3. The child failing to get past the shadows mentioned above

What do these connections mean? Well, it's possible that the crying child could have easily misunderstood what he was seeing when he saw the animatronics "in shadows". After all, trying to go to that area in the mingames at anytime besides the specific scenario above will cause a message to appear, saying "NO! Don't you remember what you saw?" etcetera. This voice comes from what we can assume is our "Phsycic Friend, Fredbear" and he seems to be in our minds, controlling our actions indirectly (since we can't progress in the minigames unless we do what he says), so I begin to wonder if he knows what is in our mind (as the crying child). What could the crying child have possibly misunderstood what exactly was happening from looking at the shadows of the animatronics?

I... actually am not sure. But hey, this IS a discussion, right? I'd like to hear what you think, you brilliant theorists!

Me i was thinking more about purple guy, he is in the shadow of a pitch black room, ( safe room?) there is a table in front of the door to keep it not accessible.

And i think that ''What is seen in shadows can be easily misunderstood in the mind of a child'' means that purple man was not teaching how to use the spring locks suit but was stuffing a kid.

[tloyc2017]

Originally posted by potrice-killer:

Me i was thinking more about purple guy, he is in the shadow of a pitch black room, ( safe room?) there is a table in front of the door to keep it not accessible.

And i think that ''What is seen in shadows can be easily misunderstood in the mind of a child'' means that purple man was not teaching how to use the spring locks suit but was stuffing a kid.

Makes enough sense, until you remember that the Purple Guy appears after whatever caused the kid to be scared of the restaurant.

Which means, no, it probably wasn't that unless Scott's sneaking flashbacks into his minigames, which are themselves flashbacks, which makes zero sense.

[potrice-killer]

I got this theory of the purple guy being jeremy becuz first

1:purple guy doesn't have a badge until the save them mini game in FNAF 2, weird... it's at the same time jeremy got hired. purple man doesn't have a badge in any other mini game in FNAF 2 meaning he was not an employee.

2:the first 3 night phone guy act normal until night 4 when a suit went missing. Night 6 is when the place closed down, they probably found the body's in the toy and that's why fazbear entertainment can't use them anymore

3: Jeremy is the only night guard who never got fired, he in fact moved to day shift.
when the place in FNAF 2 closed down Jeremy was moved to fredbear family diner the sister location. Thats why the purple guy has a badge un fredbear family diner and this is where the bite of 87 took place.

[Dabo =]]

Originally posted by tloyc2015:

I'm under the impression that he's scared of the restaurant in general, not the animatronics. After all... why would you want to go deeper into a place that you saw people get murdered in?

Let that sink in for a second.

Yes, I know, MatPat essentially copyrighted that theory, I don't care, it makes the most sense.

This is a good theory, but regardless, I think it's... eeh.

Also.

Originally posted by draco:

that was long but a very good and complicated theory.

This isn't long. This is short, all things considered.

You bring up a good point, why would you go deeper into the resturaunt you saw people murdered in? But that wasn't what we were originally told to do. We were told to leave, but we were stopped because the man in the Fredbear suit appeared. We are then told to go the other way to get someone who will help. Then: "You will find help if you can get past them. You have to be strong." But, as we can tell, we didn't get past them. But it seems that the man in the Fredbear suit wasn't a threat to us, since we are perfectly fine in the next minigame. And some of the children make fun of us for being scared and hiding under the tables, like we did previously. I'm just thinking that "what we think we saw" isn't what actually happened. After all, if there was an incident like a murder, the other children would know because they would notice that the victim was missing, and even give them a reason to be scared like the crying child. But they aren't scared, and I am theorizing that this is because nothing happened that would make them feel afraid, and the crying child misunderstood what he thinks is a murder, or some other incident. At least, nothing happened before... until you-know-what occurs... (83, 87, I'm not going to discuss that now)

Also, yes, this theory is kinda eeh. It's midnight for me, and I was too impatient to not make a discussion about it (or give it some more thought in the morning).

And sorry if what I just replied with was even more confusing.

[Braystar★]

Well obviously the Shadows the kid sees may not actually be real

[Dabo =]]

Originally posted by Braystar:

Well obviously the Shadows the kid sees may not actually be real

I wasn't really trying to imply that the shadows are all in the kid's imagination, just that he misunderstood what he saw the shadows of. He is a child and, by extension, he has the mind of a child.

Originally, this post was only going to point out a connection between Scott's hint and the post-night 2 minigame in FNAF 4, but I guess it turned more into a theory than I intended.
I wanted this connection to be a point of discussion to determine if it had any relevance or not.