Is Mattpat really the greatest?

[ellie]

I don't understand, most people praise him, saying he pretty much gets everything right, so i checked him out and some theories and recent fnaf theories he made were laughable, why do people like this guy so much?

I'm not sure if this is a adequate post, please delete if not.

[Salvation_crucifix]

Publicado originalmente por xXFusion_ChaliceXx:

Publicado originalmente por Poopet:

I don't understand, most people praise him, saying he pretty much gets everything right, so i checked him out and some theories and recent fnaf theories he made were laughable, why do people like this guy so much?

I'm not sure if this is a adequate post, please delete if not.

his theories seem to be backed up with evidence, but the longer he goes on the more obvious it is that some stuff was just brought out of nowhere, plus a lot of the stuff he says in theories just seem to be random ideas in the end

That's what a theory is....

[Doctor Script]

Publicado originalmente por chrisbutler2765:

Do you have proof that Purple Guy isn't the killer? I mean, legitimate, solid proof?

Tell me, if Purple Guy didn't murder the children, who did?

Who killed the children?

The only suspect the game seems to point to is the man with the purple skin and malicious eyes, regardless of whether that person is Michael, William, or somebody else.

Give me evidence that Purple Guy didn't kill the children.

The Puppet.

The CEO, as Rippo explained (Thanks for having my back, I appreciate it.), has motivation to kill the puppet, if the store isn't owned by him at that point. The take away from the game isn't that Purple man is the killer; It sets up why the puppet kills 5 kids at a time.

He wanted to be invited to a birthday party.

I'm happy to oblige proof and evidence to the theory. No human character has any reason to kill children, let alone 5 in a suit that will kill them when you breathe to heavily. We spend exorbitant amounts of time looking at who the purple man could be, hoping to get insight as to why and how he did what he did. This is natural, we're trying to establish a protagonist (No, protagonist doesn't mean hero/good guy. Trust me, I know what I'm talking about). Phone guy has no motivation, The previous night guard in FNAF2 has no motivation, The CEO has no motivation.

So, we subsidize this issue by calling him crazy. There is no proof that he is insane.

However, when we look at the story structure in the games, many unusual choice by Cawthon come to light. Why does the game start and end with birthday parties? Because the conflict is resolved by Victim of FNAF4 inviting the puppet to his birthday party. Why does the puppet give gifts to the children? Because they need gifts for the party. Why doesn't Golden Freddy get a gift? Because he's the birthday boy, He will receive the gifts at the party.

Who hides the bodies? The Puppet. Who is the only character definitively at both locations where the missing child murders occur? The Puppet. Who has access to the safe rooms for no apparent reason? The Puppet ("I'll be honest, I never liked that puppet thing... it's Always... Thinking. And it can go anywhere." -Phone guy, FNAF2). If the puppet is out for revenge, there is no reason he can't kill the purple guy, but he just glides right past him. The puppet also doesn't breathe and doesn't have a face for the facial recognition software.

When Spring Bonnie is sealed away, the murders stop. Why does he kill two sets of 5 kids? Because the first set are being taken apart. Why does he have Golden Freddy's endoskeleton? Because Golden Freddy, the birthday boy, didn't invite him.

I can keep going; there is literally nothing in the games that hint to Purple Guy being responsible to any of the murders aside from the one we are shown, and a lot of evidence that he Couldn't commit the murders. The spring suits, the lack of any character development of any characters except phone guy.

I called the involvement of twins before the silver eyes was released. I called the Purple guys were the CEO and Phone Guy (Purple guard, the badge is the signifier, not the color). I found out that Cawthon had three children before his youngest son was born, incidentally (As he associates himself with phone guy, and phone guy has three children). And I've spotted a few different ways that Cawthon put the timeline into the game (Such as the associated seasons, and the walk home in FNAF4). I'm not a plebeian here. It might not require a doctorate to solve FNAF, but I'd expect a Rocket Scientist to be able to fix a bike none-the-less.

[Chu]

Publicado originalmente por Doctor Script:

Publicado originalmente por chrisbutler2765:

Do you have proof that Purple Guy isn't the killer? I mean, legitimate, solid proof?

Tell me, if Purple Guy didn't murder the children, who did?

Who killed the children?

The only suspect the game seems to point to is the man with the purple skin and malicious eyes, regardless of whether that person is Michael, William, or somebody else.

Give me evidence that Purple Guy didn't kill the children.

The Puppet.

The CEO, as Rippo explained (Thanks for having my back, I appreciate it.), has motivation to kill the puppet, if the store isn't owned by him at that point. The take away from the game isn't that Purple man is the killer; It sets up why the puppet kills 5 kids at a time.

He wanted to be invited to a birthday party.

I'm happy to oblige proof and evidence to the theory. No human character has any reason to kill children, let alone 5 in a suit that will kill them when you breathe to heavily. We spend exorbitant amounts of time looking at who the purple man could be, hoping to get insight as to why and how he did what he did. This is natural, we're trying to establish a protagonist (No, protagonist doesn't mean hero/good guy. Trust me, I know what I'm talking about). Phone guy has no motivation, The previous night guard in FNAF2 has no motivation, The CEO has no motivation.

So, we subsidize this issue by calling him crazy. There is no proof that he is insane.

However, when we look at the story structure in the games, many unusual choice by Cawthon come to light. Why does the game start and end with birthday parties? Because the conflict is resolved by Victim of FNAF4 inviting the puppet to his birthday party. Why does the puppet give gifts to the children? Because they need gifts for the party. Why doesn't Golden Freddy get a gift? Because he's the birthday boy, He will receive the gifts at the party.

Who hides the bodies? The Puppet. Who is the only character definitively at both locations where the missing child murders occur? The Puppet. Who has access to the safe rooms for no apparent reason? The Puppet ("I'll be honest, I never liked that puppet thing... it's Always... Thinking. And it can go anywhere." -Phone guy, FNAF2). If the puppet is out for revenge, there is no reason he can't kill the purple guy, but he just glides right past him. The puppet also doesn't breathe and doesn't have a face for the facial recognition software.

When Spring Bonnie is sealed away, the murders stop. Why does he kill two sets of 5 kids? Because the first set are being taken apart. Why does he have Golden Freddy's endoskeleton? Because Golden Freddy, the birthday boy, didn't invite him.

I can keep going; there is literally nothing in the games that hint to Purple Guy being responsible to any of the murders aside from the one we are shown, and a lot of evidence that he Couldn't commit the murders. The spring suits, the lack of any character development of any characters except phone guy.

I called the involvement of twins before the silver eyes was released. I called the Purple guys were the CEO and Phone Guy (Purple guard, the badge is the signifier, not the color). I found out that Cawthon had three children before his youngest son was born, incidentally (As he associates himself with phone guy, and phone guy has three children). And I've spotted a few different ways that Cawthon put the timeline into the game (Such as the associated seasons, and the walk home in FNAF4). I'm not a plebeian here. It might not require a doctorate to solve FNAF, but I'd expect a Rocket Scientist to be able to fix a bike none-the-less.

We see William Afton aka Pink Guy kill children twice in the minigames, come on man, this is just being ignorant.

[Doctor Script]

No, we see him kill once. When he has a motive to kill. The second time, he happens to be around. By that logic, we see Foxy kill three times, as Foxy is always around dead bodies too.

I'm not really 100% sure what to make of GO GO GO. I don't believe the children were alive at all in the process, given the bottom child not being happy. I'm fairly confident that is Golden Freddy not cooperating with the other children. I use to believe that the Pink Guy is the puppet reflecting his murderer, as it uses the exact same sprite (Something Cawthon has never done before or since) just mirrored. I admit that is a bit of a stretch, but why Purple Man is around to see the dead bodies doesn't make a lot of narrative sense.

Either A) he killed the children, in which case, we should have some development of the people who can be purple man so we can solve the murder. We don't, so this line of thought is caustic to the goal. It encourages inferring things that aren't present within the source material.

Or B) he found the children's bodies because the puppet is trying to have fun with the dead kids. This also doesn't make much sense, as the children aren't laid to rest. If this is in the middle of the night (the only time Purple Man would be able to see the puppet playing with the corpses) then he shouldn't be there, considering how dangerous the animatronics are after hours.

So my only real conclusion is C), He isn't literally there, He is watching the tapes. The first two runs are how the puppet sees the events going on, but when the CEO watches the tapes from the night shift, he sees the corpses arranged to enjoy foxy putting on a show. So, he knows the bodies are still in the establishment, but he can only point the finger at the Night Guard, as the puppet avoids detection by dressing up as Spring Bonnie.

Again, the purple man is never shown killing the kids, he is only shown killing the puppet. And what a fitting punishment for a man who killed a child to purchase a family restaurant but to have the business plagued with children's deaths?

[Dani]

Publicado originalmente por Doctor Script:

No, we see him kill once. When he has a motive to kill. The second time, he happens to be around. By that logic, we see Foxy kill three times, as Foxy is always around dead bodies too.

I'm not really 100% sure what to make of GO GO GO. I don't believe the children were alive at all in the process, given the bottom child not being happy. I'm fairly confident that is Golden Freddy not cooperating with the other children. I use to believe that the Pink Guy is the puppet reflecting his murderer, as it uses the exact same sprite (Something Cawthon has never done before or since) just mirrored. I admit that is a bit of a stretch, but why Purple Man is around to see the dead bodies doesn't make a lot of narrative sense.

Either A) he killed the children, in which case, we should have some development of the people who can be purple man so we can solve the murder. We don't, so this line of thought is caustic to the goal. It encourages inferring things that aren't present within the source material.

Or B) he found the children's bodies because the puppet is trying to have fun with the dead kids. This also doesn't make much sense, as the children aren't laid to rest. If this is in the middle of the night (the only time Purple Man would be able to see the puppet playing with the corpses) then he shouldn't be there, considering how dangerous the animatronics are after hours.

So my only real conclusion is C), He isn't literally there, He is watching the tapes. The first two runs are how the puppet sees the events going on, but when the CEO watches the tapes from the night shift, he sees the corpses arranged to enjoy foxy putting on a show. So, he knows the bodies are still in the establishment, but he can only point the finger at the Night Guard, as the puppet avoids detection by dressing up as Spring Bonnie.

Again, the purple man is never shown killing the kids, he is only shown killing the puppet. And what a fitting punishment for a man who killed a child to purchase a family restaurant but to have the business plagued with children's deaths?

The murderer was freaking arrested and convicted. This immediately confirms the Marionnette didn't kill them because he's an animatronic. They'd deactivate the Marionnette and destroy him, not arrest him.

[Salvation_crucifix]

Publicado originalmente por Doctor Script:

Publicado originalmente por chrisbutler2765:

Do you have proof that Purple Guy isn't the killer? I mean, legitimate, solid proof?

Tell me, if Purple Guy didn't murder the children, who did?

Who killed the children?

The only suspect the game seems to point to is the man with the purple skin and malicious eyes, regardless of whether that person is Michael, William, or somebody else.

Give me evidence that Purple Guy didn't kill the children.

The Puppet.

The CEO, as Rippo explained (Thanks for having my back, I appreciate it.), has motivation to kill the puppet, if the store isn't owned by him at that point. The take away from the game isn't that Purple man is the killer; It sets up why the puppet kills 5 kids at a time.

He wanted to be invited to a birthday party.

I'm happy to oblige proof and evidence to the theory. No human character has any reason to kill children, let alone 5 in a suit that will kill them when you breathe to heavily. We spend exorbitant amounts of time looking at who the purple man could be, hoping to get insight as to why and how he did what he did. This is natural, we're trying to establish a protagonist (No, protagonist doesn't mean hero/good guy. Trust me, I know what I'm talking about). Phone guy has no motivation, The previous night guard in FNAF2 has no motivation, The CEO has no motivation.

So, we subsidize this issue by calling him crazy. There is no proof that he is insane.

However, when we look at the story structure in the games, many unusual choice by Cawthon come to light. Why does the game start and end with birthday parties? Because the conflict is resolved by Victim of FNAF4 inviting the puppet to his birthday party. Why does the puppet give gifts to the children? Because they need gifts for the party. Why doesn't Golden Freddy get a gift? Because he's the birthday boy, He will receive the gifts at the party.

Who hides the bodies? The Puppet. Who is the only character definitively at both locations where the missing child murders occur? The Puppet. Who has access to the safe rooms for no apparent reason? The Puppet ("I'll be honest, I never liked that puppet thing... it's Always... Thinking. And it can go anywhere." -Phone guy, FNAF2). If the puppet is out for revenge, there is no reason he can't kill the purple guy, but he just glides right past him. The puppet also doesn't breathe and doesn't have a face for the facial recognition software.

When Spring Bonnie is sealed away, the murders stop. Why does he kill two sets of 5 kids? Because the first set are being taken apart. Why does he have Golden Freddy's endoskeleton? Because Golden Freddy, the birthday boy, didn't invite him.

I can keep going; there is literally nothing in the games that hint to Purple Guy being responsible to any of the murders aside from the one we are shown, and a lot of evidence that he Couldn't commit the murders. The spring suits, the lack of any character development of any characters except phone guy.

I called the involvement of twins before the silver eyes was released. I called the Purple guys were the CEO and Phone Guy (Purple guard, the badge is the signifier, not the color). I found out that Cawthon had three children before his youngest son was born, incidentally (As he associates himself with phone guy, and phone guy has three children). And I've spotted a few different ways that Cawthon put the timeline into the game (Such as the associated seasons, and the walk home in FNAF4). I'm not a plebeian here. It might not require a doctorate to solve FNAF, but I'd expect a Rocket Scientist to be able to fix a bike none-the-less.

Yeah, but that, like all theories, can be debunked. What about Give Gifts, Give Life? What about the SAVE THEM minigame? What about FNaF 3's Happiest Day?

If Purple Guy didn't murder the children, assuming he's innocent, why did he try to stop the Puppet and Freddy? Why was he seen CLEARLY murdering a child in the Cake minigame?

There are a whole slew of things you need to debunk until you can make a case for the Puppet being the killer.

And no, if you've read Silver Eyes, which is pretty much accepted by now to be canon, Afton is the killer in that novel.

And insane people walk around outside all the time, why not in the FNaF universe? Unless all humans are sane.

And, in that case, why did the Puppet use Freddy during that minigame? Why did he need to recruit six spirits if he can just do in Purple Guy himself?

Why didn't HE disassemble the suits to set free the spirits and get them P. Guy's demise?

WHY DID HE EVEN RESURRECT THE SPIRITS ANYWAY?

Why didn't the spirits recognize that their killer was a marionette?

There are a lot of things in this theory that contradict evidence from the games.

[bordanka]

I personally find his theories OK. MatPat might be wrong in one thing but right in another, as all theorists are. I don't know why everybody gets so mad if his (anyone's) theory is not 100 percent accurate. Theories hasn't to be 100% accurate. After all, game theories are made for fun. I see no reason to be mad at him.
Also, I see a pretty cruel move Scott is doing throughout the series. He looks through people's theories and opinions (especially MatPat's as he is one of the main sources of ideas and information) and alters the plot so everything that people has made up is wrong or things that most of people can't accept are true.
I don't say that Scott doesn't have a complete story in mind. He has, and it seems like it's pretty complicated, but it's unstable. Scott will keep on changing everything until main FNaF theorists stop making new theories and until some official source appeares that summs up most part of the story. I believe MatPat has realized it and that's the reasons he didn't make a theory about GFM cutscense. He is waiting, waiting for the guide book and The Twisted Ones release so nothing can be altered without causing contradiction. Or he gave up because story does unnecessary twists and the Community ♥♥♥♥♥ on him.

[DarkBat]

He's never outsmarted Scott, same as any other theorist

[Chu]

Publicado originalmente por Doctor Script:

No, we see him kill once. When he has a motive to kill. The second time, he happens to be around. By that logic, we see Foxy kill three times, as Foxy is always around dead bodies too.

I'm not really 100% sure what to make of GO GO GO. I don't believe the children were alive at all in the process, given the bottom child not being happy. I'm fairly confident that is Golden Freddy not cooperating with the other children. I use to believe that the Pink Guy is the puppet reflecting his murderer, as it uses the exact same sprite (Something Cawthon has never done before or since) just mirrored. I admit that is a bit of a stretch, but why Purple Man is around to see the dead bodies doesn't make a lot of narrative sense.

Either A) he killed the children, in which case, we should have some development of the people who can be purple man so we can solve the murder. We don't, so this line of thought is caustic to the goal. It encourages inferring things that aren't present within the source material.

Or B) he found the children's bodies because the puppet is trying to have fun with the dead kids. This also doesn't make much sense, as the children aren't laid to rest. If this is in the middle of the night (the only time Purple Man would be able to see the puppet playing with the corpses) then he shouldn't be there, considering how dangerous the animatronics are after hours.

So my only real conclusion is C), He isn't literally there, He is watching the tapes. The first two runs are how the puppet sees the events going on, but when the CEO watches the tapes from the night shift, he sees the corpses arranged to enjoy foxy putting on a show. So, he knows the bodies are still in the establishment, but he can only point the finger at the Night Guard, as the puppet avoids detection by dressing up as Spring Bonnie.

Again, the purple man is never shown killing the kids, he is only shown killing the puppet. And what a fitting punishment for a man who killed a child to purchase a family restaurant but to have the business plagued with children's deaths?

Dude, please.

I've been having a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ month, I'm not really in the mood to regurgitate information discovered back when earlier fnaf games were released.

Please just drop this conversation, my brain hurts.

[Salvation_crucifix]

Publicado originalmente por bordanka:

I personally find his theories OK. MatPat might be wrong in one thing but right in another, as all theorists are. I don't know why everybody gets so mad if his (anyone's) theory is not 100 percent accurate. Theories hasn't to be 100% accurate. After all, game theories are made for fun. I see no reason to be mad at him.
Also, I see a pretty cruel move Scott is doing throughout the series. He looks through people's theories and opinions (especially MatPat's as he is one of the main sources of ideas and information) and alters the plot so everything that people has made up is wrong or things that the most of people can't accept are true.
I don't say that Scott doesn't have a complete story in mind. He has, and it seems like it's pretty complicated, but it's unstable. Scott will keep on changing everything until main FNaF theorists stop making new theories and until some official source appeares that summs up most part of the story. I believe MatPat has realized it and that's the reasons he didn't make a theory about GFM cutscense. He is waiting, waiting for the guide book and The Twisted Ones release so nothing can be altered without causing contradiction. Or he gave up because story does unnecessary twists and the Community ♥♥♥♥♥ on him.

Exactly. This is what I'm saying!

[bordanka]

Publicado originalmente por chrisbutler2765:

Publicado originalmente por bordanka:

I personally find his theories OK. MatPat might be wrong in one thing but right in another, as all theorists are. I don't know why everybody gets so mad if his (anyone's) theory is not 100 percent accurate. Theories hasn't to be 100% accurate. After all, game theories are made for fun. I see no reason to be mad at him.
Also, I see a pretty cruel move Scott is doing throughout the series. He looks through people's theories and opinions (especially MatPat's as he is one of the main sources of ideas and information) and alters the plot so everything that people has made up is wrong or things that the most of people can't accept are true.
I don't say that Scott doesn't have a complete story in mind. He has, and it seems like it's pretty complicated, but it's unstable. Scott will keep on changing everything until main FNaF theorists stop making new theories and until some official source appeares that summs up most part of the story. I believe MatPat has realized it and that's the reasons he didn't make a theory about GFM cutscense. He is waiting, waiting for the guide book and The Twisted Ones release so nothing can be altered without causing contradiction. Or he gave up because story does unnecessary twists and the Community ♥♥♥♥♥ on him.

Exactly. This is what I'm saying!

I'm glad we understood each other

[bordanka]

Publicado originalmente por chrisbutler2765:

Publicado originalmente por Doctor Script:

Purple Guy, Pink Guy, Mauve Murderer, Clandestine Clematis Child-killer, whatever you want to call him.

IF FNAF1-4 can be solved, AND FNAF1-4 is a stand alone story, THEN we should be able to piece the story together without needing external information. THEREFORE, Purple man, and by extension Pink Guy, Mauve Murderer and the Clandestine Clematis Child-killer, can't be the missing children killers, as the plot only puts blockers in the way for adults human characters to be the killer.

We don't even have William Afton appearing in FNAF1-4. The closest we get is "The CEO". No mention of his son, his partner, or even why SL exists. We don't get a look at his psyche, because it's not important to the story.

I call this interpretation of the story "The Rydian Purple Guy" because Rydi is a walking encyclopedia of FNAF lore and clues and hints. If I were to ever buy into FNAF1-4 being a group of kids patiently killing night guards, hoping that Purple man rears his head to strike again by being a night guard, I would follow Rydi's theory.

The problem is the postulate of 'Purple Guy is obviously the killer'. I think he is obviously a red herring. No human character can fit the role of Purple Guy and have a reason to kill the children, when, where and how the murders were committed.

I know I went off on a tangent, and I apologize. MatPat behaves as an educator, but doesn't honor the responsibilities of that role. Nearly all of the Film Theory episodes relies on simply omitting damning evidence which contradicts his theory. This makes him more believable, and more trust-worthy (Ironically), despite being inherently wrong in nearly every video he produces.

MatPat has a habit of drawing the worst of me out, now a days. He's a snake oil salesmen of Education. He has found a means to hi-jack the legitimacy of science to assure people that he is out to make them smarter, whilst turning over that authors and creatives are out to fool and deceive them, and he is the only one to save you from this vile people who would dare try to entertain you.

Because Science is able to use science and fiction in harmony to explain the ramifications of fictional breaches in reality. Treesicle does a fantastic job of explore lore and entertaining without implying that something dark is going on underneath. Gnoggin's "It All Comes Together" Series is some of the best amateur Lit. Theory work I have ever witnessed, using cultural anthropology, European and Japanese History and the entire catalog of Pokemon games and TV shows to draw a really sound conclusion.

So why does MatPat get to garner more success and notoriety by using consumer psychology against his fan base? Why does he constantly get praise, views and subscribers for deliberately warping the truth, misrepresenting the source and belittling the hard work of authors and game developers. Look at a video from John Solo or the theorizer or Super Carlin Bros and compare the tone of the videos to MatPat.

*sigh* I'm going to go get a drink. I don't think the soap box can handle the weight of my anger if I continue much longer. My point was that MatPat's formula puts Phone Guy in the cross hairs and he 'Happened' to be right because of it. Unfortunately, Purple guy is not the missing child killer, so he isn't entirely correct.

Do you have proof that Purple Guy isn't the killer? I mean, legitimate, solid proof?

Tell me, if Purple Guy didn't murder the children, who did?

Who killed the children?

The only suspect the game seems to point to is the man with the purple skin and malicious eyes, regardless of whether that person is Michael, William, or somebody else.

Give me evidence that Purple Guy didn't kill the children.

And that's the thing you guys don't seem to understand.



Five Nights at Freddy's, Undertale, all of these games and others give the Player the chance to theorize, to piece together their own conclusions with the parts that their creators have given their respective fanbases.

They're allowed to freely do these things, in fact these games I'm sure were specifically DESIGNED SO that the Players could theorize.

Everything you read nowadays has some kind of twisting of the truth, whether in regard to politics, religion, movies, or TV.

There will always be a flaw in EVERY SINGLE THEORY anyone makes, doesn't matter who.

MatPat will have a flaw, PrettyGrumpyBear will have a flaw, YOU guys will have flaws, I will have flaws in the theories I make.

We will NEVER be able to piece together the FNaF franchise successfully, you know why?

Because we are not Scott Cawthon.

The story of these games is constantly in flux, any solid story or evidence that we have to craft one can just be yanked out of our hands with another game, or book, or Steam post that Scott puts out.

Heck, Undertale has been out for what, 2 years now? And yet we seem to be no closer to figuring out the identity of Gaster and Sans's backstory than we ever were.

Because not only do we not have enough evidence to accurately conclude the identity of those two, but Toby Fox has not put IN enough evidence for us to.

Sans is Ness is stupid, people keep saying.

I can agree that there might not be enough evidence IN THE GAME to support that theory, but, my question is, is there enough evidence to disprove it?

Think about it.

How do we know that Sans was affiliated with Gaster, at all?

We don't.

People automatically assume that Gaster and Sans knew each other simply because of the LACK of solid evidence in Sans's workshop and the throw-away comment made by him during his Genocide boss fight, as well as his quantum physics knowledge and the Gaster blasters he uses.

Does any of that prove that Sans is a time-traveler? Maybe.

Does that prove that Sans and Gaster knew each other? NO, it does not.

Heck, we don't even know what the machine behind the curtain is! People say that it's a time machine, well, I could just as easily say that, knowing Sans' trollerific nature, it could just as easily be his sentry station.

And nobody could deny or confirm it, except Toby Fox himself.

See, none of us can come up with a solid, stable theory with these games remaining unsolved and still constantly moving forward.

And if somebody DOES come up with a solid theory, there's always going to be differing opinions, it's what makes us Conservative and Liberal, Religious and Atheist, it's what makes us.....Human.

And when people can finally accept that and everybody can dismount and stop whining "MatPat is wrong! MatPat is wrong! MatPat is wrong!" like the spoiled brats the Human race are, maybe we CAN come to a logical conclusion, regardless.



But that's just wishful thinking......

You know what? Just because I'm tired of making these same points over and over, here's another one for you:

+

[Salvation_crucifix]

Publicado originalmente por bordanka:

Publicado originalmente por chrisbutler2765:

Do you have proof that Purple Guy isn't the killer? I mean, legitimate, solid proof?

Tell me, if Purple Guy didn't murder the children, who did?

Who killed the children?

The only suspect the game seems to point to is the man with the purple skin and malicious eyes, regardless of whether that person is Michael, William, or somebody else.

Give me evidence that Purple Guy didn't kill the children.

And that's the thing you guys don't seem to understand.



Five Nights at Freddy's, Undertale, all of these games and others give the Player the chance to theorize, to piece together their own conclusions with the parts that their creators have given their respective fanbases.

They're allowed to freely do these things, in fact these games I'm sure were specifically DESIGNED SO that the Players could theorize.

Everything you read nowadays has some kind of twisting of the truth, whether in regard to politics, religion, movies, or TV.

There will always be a flaw in EVERY SINGLE THEORY anyone makes, doesn't matter who.

MatPat will have a flaw, PrettyGrumpyBear will have a flaw, YOU guys will have flaws, I will have flaws in the theories I make.

We will NEVER be able to piece together the FNaF franchise successfully, you know why?

Because we are not Scott Cawthon.

The story of these games is constantly in flux, any solid story or evidence that we have to craft one can just be yanked out of our hands with another game, or book, or Steam post that Scott puts out.

Heck, Undertale has been out for what, 2 years now? And yet we seem to be no closer to figuring out the identity of Gaster and Sans's backstory than we ever were.

Because not only do we not have enough evidence to accurately conclude the identity of those two, but Toby Fox has not put IN enough evidence for us to.

Sans is Ness is stupid, people keep saying.

I can agree that there might not be enough evidence IN THE GAME to support that theory, but, my question is, is there enough evidence to disprove it?

Think about it.

How do we know that Sans was affiliated with Gaster, at all?

We don't.

People automatically assume that Gaster and Sans knew each other simply because of the LACK of solid evidence in Sans's workshop and the throw-away comment made by him during his Genocide boss fight, as well as his quantum physics knowledge and the Gaster blasters he uses.

Does any of that prove that Sans is a time-traveler? Maybe.

Does that prove that Sans and Gaster knew each other? NO, it does not.

Heck, we don't even know what the machine behind the curtain is! People say that it's a time machine, well, I could just as easily say that, knowing Sans' trollerific nature, it could just as easily be his sentry station.

And nobody could deny or confirm it, except Toby Fox himself.

See, none of us can come up with a solid, stable theory with these games remaining unsolved and still constantly moving forward.

And if somebody DOES come up with a solid theory, there's always going to be differing opinions, it's what makes us Conservative and Liberal, Religious and Atheist, it's what makes us.....Human.

And when people can finally accept that and everybody can dismount and stop whining "MatPat is wrong! MatPat is wrong! MatPat is wrong!" like the spoiled brats the Human race are, maybe we CAN come to a logical conclusion, regardless.



But that's just wishful thinking......

You know what? Just because I'm tired of making these same points over and over, here's another one for you:

+

Haha. I'm starting to wonder if the plus is the Steam equivalent to Reddit's Gold. Regardless, I appreciate it.