Updates Wednesdays

Comic 119 - A Night at Freddy's: Part 5

Posted on Wednesday, the 29th of October at 12:00 AM, 2014 in 2014

Author Notes:

DanVzare Wed, 29. Oct 12:00 AM, 2014 edit delete
Time for one last theory before I put this five-parter to rest. But before I elaborate on my theory, what have you thought to this multi-parter? Did you like it? Do you want to see more multi-parters? Would you prefer me to never do a multi-parter ever again?
I'd love to hear your opinions on the matter.

Now onto my final theory. The theory to end all theories!
This theory I have is kind of a meta-theory. It's the type of theory I doubt anyone would believe, and even if they did they wouldn't want to. But at the same time, it's a theory that makes sense, especially from a design perspective. But enough dilly dallying, it's time to reveal this theory!

What if... there is no lore. What if every scary thing should just be taken at face value as what it is. What if the creator just put in everything that he thought was scary, regardless of context. It's perfectly plausible that the creation process in his head went something along the lines of "You know what's scary... being trapped in a room with monsters trying to get in. Hmm, but why would you be doing that? Ah well, let's just copy Night at the Museum and see if it works!"
If you look at it, a lot of things do kind of seem as though they were merely added because they looked scary. Changing newspaper clippings, a Golden Freddy that just appears out of nowhere, a voice on the phone dying. Heck, the creator even said so himself that the reason why the kitchen camera doesn't work is because he wanted a room for people just to imagine. If you take that info about the kitchen and apply it to the entire game, it becomes quite easy to hypothesize that every last bit of lore you might be able to find out (such as the murders), has nothing to do with what's happening in the game, and that they were merely added to make you IMAGINE!
In all honesty, most of the fear I got from this game was from trying to figure out what the heck was going on, since nothing really makes sense (just look at all of my other comments in the past parts and you’ll see what I mean). But if you realize that maybe there isn't a purpose, that it isn't supposed to make sense, and that there is no reason why, then all of a sudden it does make sense.
Of course, as soon as you accept such a theory, any mystery in the game suddenly becomes lost (which wouldn’t make the game as scary or as fun). As a result, I doubt anyone would accept this theory, and I also doubt the creator would admit to it either.

But before I end this, I'd like to make one last point of note. In Alice in Wonderland, there is a riddle. "Why is a raven like a writing desk?". The riddle was never meant to have an answer. It was made up merely to confuse the reader, but people none the less tried to find the answer believing there to be one. In the end, the creator Lewis Carroll wrote down an answer which was "Because it can produce a few notes, tho they are very flat; and it is nevar put with the wrong end in front!"
But as stated by Lewis Carroll himself, it was merely an afterthought, and that the riddle was never meant to have a correct answer.
Perhaps the same is true for Five Nights at Freddy's.

Think about it. You don’t have to agree or disagree with me, just consider it. Is it possible?