4 Parts that Toy Chica's Cutscenes is as a Lore, such as Toy Chica as William Afton in a Backroom or Biology (and confirmation that certain victims were killed by William Afton in FNAF lore)

[Lorexza Davinci ExrenzoAparatzi]

Toy Chica, man oh man, what a coincidence indeed. Where can I start?

When I first saw the cutscenes for the first time, I thought the cutscenes are just repeated similar lines until 50/20 mode, driving me insane because I hear the same situation comming at me again and again and again. But, when I saw her bag at 50/20 mode cutscene, I noticed 7 parts of each "crush" Toy Chica had in the past. It reminded me of William afton killing the 7 children in the original location, then I had a spark on my mind. Remember that Biology class every single cutscene Toy Chica had to get a crush? Biology means Life Science, Amputation, and Mutation, and that room reminds me of the William Afton luring kids as SpringBonnie at the time because of this line she always says "-she/he be mine at the end of the day"(I am bad at biology, so just forgive my enthusiasm please). The Characters in FNAF UCN are all killed and possessed, because in FNAF3 certain characters are in the HAPPIEST DAY EVER minigame, that includes the Mediocre Band (and obviously the old FNAF characters: Freddy, Bonnie, Chica, Foxy, Puppet, and Golden Freddy) all of the animatronics are burned down and freed except the Puppet, and rest is history in FFPS.(I mean, come on now, isn't it obvious?)

When Toy Chica had a crush with the Wolf (yes it is indeed in FNAF3 HAPPIEST DAY EVER cutscene, we know this by now because a kid had a gray mask with a mouth on front sitting next to the tables), she said "I told him that someone ran over his dog in front of my house", it's a metaphor that William Afton did indeed ran over the Fruity Maze Player's dog and William used the remnant to bring Mangle to life, and that's Bite of 87, rest is history.

Toy Chica is basically telling us that she's luring every single victim, killing them, and "stuffing" the parts into her bag. Kind of obvious that William Afton is stuffing victims into animatronic suits, but, as time goes on, her new "crushes" a.k.a. Victims are getting more and more suspicious about her bag, and so does William Afton with the news reports on certain newspapers that are hanging on walls as Easter Eggs such as FNAF1, and all of them are telling that somebody killed a quantity# of children inside Freddy Fazbear's Pizzeria, in one room. Heck, 3 phone guys even metioned the FNAF2 place whom a child got bitten in frontal lobe in FNAF1, lockdown of FNAF2 because of murder in Original Location, and the weird phone guy dude giving out the original phone calls at Fredbear's Family Diner that a SpringBonnie Costume was moved to another location.

This is also in part of a metaphor in all of Candy Cadet's stories; 5 Kittens Stitched Together to One then stored into a Shoebox by a Young Boy, 5 Dead Children Stitiched and stored in One Coffin by an Old Man, 5 Keys Melted together and burned in a Fire by a Woman, A Big Group of 5 (technically 7: Henry and his Daughter a.k.a. The Puppet or Lefty, William Afton, Michael Afton, Elisabeth Afton a.k.a. Scrap Baby, and the Molten Freddy Amalgamation:"F.Freddy,F.Foxy.,Ballora,") all burned in One familiar location by Henry, and now Freddy Fazbear, The Wolf, Toy Bonnie, Funtime Foxy, Puppet, and Pigpatch, all murdered and stuffed into One single bag by Toy Chica (How fu*ked up is this?!). That story just keeps repeating and repeating and repeating itself over and over.

What do you guys think? (Please give some Positives before Negatives, so that I can improve that way.)

[Doctor Script]

There's... Only one thing that could go wrong...

with this theory, that is.

Toy Chica is ALWAYS lying to her 'Crush'. She says "I'll tell him that his dog got run over", "I'll tell him that I took 5 people Hostage"... etc...

If Chica proves anything, it's that these theories are all blatant lies. The theory that William Afton didn't kill the kids, they are just missing? Debunked (For the OLD School FNAF fans. That's even before My time). He lured them away by telling them that their dog isn't dead? Debunked. He didn't want FNAF3 to burn down? debunked... etc.

In fact, its really telling that Scott is eliminating motivations when we don't have a motive for William to Kill kids 5 at a time.

A+ for effort, but for practicality...

See me after class...

[Smithsiblings4]

hey guys! I have a theory! Mangle isn't possesed by a dog!

[TheDankDarkness]

Първоначално публикувано от smithboys5:

hey guys! I have a theory! Mangle isn't possesed by a dog!

Proof?

[Smithsiblings4]

Първоначално публикувано от TheDankDarkness:

Първоначално публикувано от smithboys5:

hey guys! I have a theory! Mangle isn't possesed by a dog!

Proof?

my proof is that literally nothing points to mangle being a dog, if we are going to assume that mangle is a dog (which we have absolutely no proof of) than lets assume that All the animatronics are dogs!

[TheDankDarkness]

Първоначално публикувано от smithboys5:

Първоначално публикувано от TheDankDarkness:

Proof?

my proof is that literally nothing points to mangle being a dog, if we are going to assume that mangle is a dog (which we have absolutely no proof of) than lets assume that All the animatronics are dogs!

Its suggested the otehr are humans because they leaked out fluids and stuff

[Smithsiblings4]

Първоначално публикувано от TheDankDarkness:

Първоначално публикувано от smithboys5:

my proof is that literally nothing points to mangle being a dog, if we are going to assume that mangle is a dog (which we have absolutely no proof of) than lets assume that All the animatronics are dogs!

Its suggested the otehr are humans because they leaked out fluids and stuff

so then lets assume that mangle is also human, since there is no evidance pointing towards him being a dog.

[TheDankDarkness]

Първоначално публикувано от smithboys5:

Първоначално публикувано от TheDankDarkness:

Its suggested the otehr are humans because they leaked out fluids and stuff

so then lets assume that mangle is also human, since there is no evidance pointing towards him being a dog.

We havent seen anyone who is mangle, the dog however is specified to be dead so it could have been harvested for remnant to be put into mangle

[NickDroid]

Първоначално публикувано от Doctor Script:

There's... Only one thing that could go wrong...

with this theory, that is.

Toy Chica is ALWAYS lying to her 'Crush'. She says "I'll tell him that his dog got run over", "I'll tell him that I took 5 people Hostage"... etc...

If Chica proves anything, it's that these theories are all blatant lies. The theory that William Afton didn't kill the kids, they are just missing? Debunked (For the OLD School FNAF fans. That's even before My time). He lured them away by telling them that their dog isn't dead? Debunked. He didn't want FNAF3 to burn down? debunked... etc.

In fact, its really telling that Scott is eliminating motivations when we don't have a motive for William to Kill kids 5 at a time.

A+ for effort, but for practicality...

See me after class...

THANK YOU

[Lorexza Davinci ExrenzoAparatzi]

Първоначално публикувано от TheDankDarkness:

Първоначално публикувано от smithboys5:

so then lets assume that mangle is also human, since there is no evidance pointing towards him being a dog.

We havent seen anyone who is mangle, the dog however is specified to be dead so it could have been harvested for remnant to be put into mangle

That's what im saying for the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ 5th time.

[Lorexza Davinci ExrenzoAparatzi]

Първоначално публикувано от Mr. Enzadavinci:

Първоначално публикувано от TheDankDarkness:

We havent seen anyone who is mangle, the dog however is specified to be dead so it could have been harvested for remnant to be put into mangle

That's what im saying for the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ 5th time.

sorry for cuss

[TheDankDarkness]

Първоначално публикувано от Mr. Enzadavinci:

Първоначално публикувано от TheDankDarkness:

We havent seen anyone who is mangle, the dog however is specified to be dead so it could have been harvested for remnant to be put into mangle

That's what im saying for the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ 5th time.

FINALLY SOMEONE WHO AGREES

[NickDroid]

Let’s look at the only evidence of Mangle being a dog:

• William Afton kills a dog. Then he says it alive to a small child. This OBVIOUSLY means that this dog truly is alive again.
  
• Mangle’s kinda like a dog, it walks on four legs, and like says garbled stuff (which dogs totally do). So OBVIOUSLY Mangle is possessed by a dog.

Now let’s look at the evidence of NOT Mangle being a dog;

• The dog is killed BEFORE FNaF 2, and Mangle is specifically made for the location. So unless the doggo’s spirit was just chilling, until Mangle was made, this doesn’t make sense...
  
• Mangle is presumed to be trying to call the police with her garbled voice, do dogs do that?
  
• You can’t tell me that if the spirit of a dog was being surrounded by a bunch of kids, loud noises, and other things, it wouldn’t freak out. Considering the doggo we see in the Minigame is a smaller dog, those tend to bark a whole hecking lot (believe me, I own 3 Dachshunds, I know)
  
• It speaks. Unless this is the dog from “Dog With A Blog”, this is impossible.

Contradict away.

[Glorious M e l o n]

MANGLE ISN'T A DOG ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. DOGS CANNOT SPEAK ENGLISH. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT'S IT IS A DOG. CASE ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ CLOSED.

[Lorexza Davinci ExrenzoAparatzi]

Първоначално публикувано от Wiggle:

MANGLE ISN'T A DOG ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. DOGS CANNOT SPEAK ENGLISH. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT'S IT IS A DOG. CASE ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ CLOSED.

Then again, it must be Michael's or William's perspective that shows Mangle talking. Everyone elses' perspective shows only garble.

[Glorious M e l o n]

Първоначално публикувано от Mr. Enzadavinci:

Първоначално публикувано от Wiggle:

MANGLE ISN'T A DOG ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. DOGS CANNOT SPEAK ENGLISH. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT'S IT IS A DOG. CASE ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ CLOSED.

Then again, it must be Michael's or William's perspective that shows Mangle talking. Everyone elses' perspective shows only garble.

The soul of the spirit IS actually there. They are all trapped.

"What is this new prison? Is it me trapped, or is it you? Perhaps it's us both."