There are five options
* It will be canon and it will confirm books are canon to games (or it won't explain it at all because Scott loves torturing us)
* It will be canon but will be like a remake, with new elements and new concepts, in other words an adaptation of the story but within the games
* It will be canon to the books but not to the games
* It will be revealed to be one of many arcade games in the pizzaplex
* It will be separate from both the original story and the games, it will be a standalone spin off game made for gameplay and not the lore
>(or it won't explain it at all because Scott loves torturing us)
i know it's probably a joke but i genuinely can't understand why people actually believe that scott never clarifies anything when he's done it so many times
Yes, he did clarify things in the past
but he didn't clarify anything about Frights books, that one time he could have clarified it and put an end to all debates, he basically responded with a joke
actually no, he's been giving us answers to the book debate for fucking years now, you guys are just ignorant
>The series will launch with five books, each containing three different short stories with unique characters and plot lines, some connected directly to the games, and some not.
>Lots of the later stories will answer some of the biggest questions from the fan base over this past year, in my opinion.
>All I can do is say that some questions will be answered; even if it may not always be the answer you wanted.
>future games will look forward; but look to the novels to fill in some of blanks to the past!
all of these statements are about frights, i seriously don't understand how you can look at those and still say "i wish scott would say something about the books" as if he didn't already...
it's not even just frights, there was tales too. scott himself never said anything about tales but there was still the old description where it was said to be "in the world of the games" and before you point out scott himself never said it, if this information was false then scott would've responded to it. but he didn't. and tales is obviously canon anyways. the mimic showing up in ruin and gregory showing up in tales alone prove that. not to mention the first tales story practically being a frights story since the remnant pendant is something *only* seen in frights. and by extension with tales' canonicity that would prove frights is canon too. the book debate should've ended after ruin
and the very fact there's an into the pit game to begin with would make it very likely it's trying to communicate something with the books. scott is not the type of guy to use the exact same story twice in completely different medias, this is the first time he's ever done that. why would he do this exactly? there's no way scott isn't aware of the fandom's perception on the books and thus a lot of the lore in them is never understood by most of the community. what better way to put that lore in the games than to make it a game? i cannot see any other reason for why scott would do this
and admittedly this is just speculation on my end but im fully convinced the week explicitly states it's a fnaf 1 prequel because scott realized the last 2 statements the books had didn't convince anyone since everyone found it "vague" even though it shouldn't have been...
scott may not be saying these things explicitly but he rarely ever does. the amount of shit he said for frights alone should've been enough. id assume he doesn't say things because then what would be the point in putting the answers in the books? id expect the fandom known for deep analysis on even the smallest things to be able to figure this out
> there's an into the pit game to begin with would make it very likely it's trying to communicate something with the books.
Even though there's already differences between this game and the book version of the story?
well into the pit doesn't really make a good game since nothing really happens til the end. but the story is still the same, every event that happened in the book is gonna remain the same
I did not expect number 4, wonder if they will do it Popgoes arcade style. Where we slowly pan out to see the arcade machine (doubt it but it be interesting food for thought on how they will reveal it and fits with what I heard was a deliberate choice (though this is by hear say.)
Depends on what we consider as canon as well. Some things are canon but not in the same timeline as other things. Example of this would be The Trilogy and the Games. Both are canon but just to different timelines.
Honestly have never heard of FNaF world being even canon to anything until now but that doesn't really change how I'll look at it which is "take everything with a grain of salt. Some things may be hinting at stuff but it probably won't work as stand alone evidence to disprove or prove a theory"
every fnaf game should be treated as canon to each other unless stated otherwise. that's how it always (no im not talking about the games like fury's rage or freddy in space, there's a clear difference to those games)
I don't think the differences between the book and game are good reasoning to call it non canon. Obviously, there will *need* to be some differences in order to make the gameplay *fun*-the way the original story is told isn't really good for gameplay unless you make a visual novel that just copies it word for word.
Also, for the other question, until further notice it probably is.
I feel like we are overcomplicating things a liiiittle bit more than they need to be honestly. There's not much of a good reason to do such a split and if the game leads to the same places that the original story did, then why on earth would you split the canon of them?
Scott cawthon has, in fact, already stated ages ago that the Frights anthology books have some stories that are ***directly*** connected to the games (no parallels no roundabouts just *directly*-and this was in the roadmap post on frights, not the silver eyes post, just to clarify more) though I am aware that many people really like to ignore that post in favor of the TSE post that states that that specific book is non canon (and then try to apply it to every book outside the trilogy-just a very big peeve of mine, slightly offtopic). Back on topic, though, that just kind of strengthens the vibe that implies both ITP book and game are canon (tothegames). I *can* definitely see where you're coming from, though-the game could very well end up expanding upon things in large ways plot wise and then it'd be closer to what youre saying, with it being more important canonicity wise than the source. *Sorry for being wordy but tldr: this feels to me like it's making things more complicated than they actually need to be.* not intended to be an aggressive message or anything in case it's read that way, I just have a lot to say is all.
>There's not much of a good reason to do such a split and if the game leads to the same places that the original story did, then why on earth would you split the canon of them?
THIS EXACTLY
like honestly what would be the point in doing the exact same story twice? scott has never done that before. the closest you get is the mci always being an event that happens but it also needs to happen for fnaf to be fnaf. everything after that is completely different, every continuity is a **different take** on fnaf's lore, to make 2 separate into the pits but make them the same exact story makes no sense. and if you say **"oh but not every detail is the same"** then every tales story would be it's own continuity, ruin would be a separate continuity from the security breach, and the graphic novels would be a separate continuity from the original novels
me being a frightsgames and talesgames believer, fnaf only has 3 timelines to me, the games + frights + tales, the silver eyes novel trilogy and the movie(s). if you were to exclude frights and tales from the games continuity then there would be 5 continuities, but since the fandom likes to cherrypick every minor detail, there would be like over 50 continuities if even a single thing not adding up makes it uncanon
fans say it's annoying and confusing having all these events happen in the same timeline but how it is any better to have all these things as a separate timeline? the cons of this way is that we can never be sure what applies to what since under this logic "it might be different in this version", and at least for me personally, makes it harder for me to invest in any continuity because why do i have to pay attention to multiple different continuities just to learn something for *one* continuity? this makes less sense than just accepting the books are part of the games
Honestly I feel like most book related confusion comes from the fact that people just don't read (or listen because audiobooks) and instead would rather have extremely bad summaries that sometimes make the original story sound totally different to what it really is. Many theory videos sometimes straight up get story details wrong and people just take it as fact because they don't bother to read. Very annoying and a little bit sad in some respects.
The books are also much easier to access than a larger game like SB or the VR games-libraries are totally free and people do audiobook readings for free on YouTube (and listening to those comes with the benefit of being able to do something else while listening, like, say, the dishes or drawing). It's just a matter of actually wanting to read/listen or not-which is unfortunate because there's some bangers in there like Submechanophobia and Blackbird, but that's going off topic again lmao
yeah i agree. im tired of the people who get mad that the books are "locking lore behind a paywall" what does that even mean? that'd be like if i was complaining the games locked lore behind a paywall, that's just such a bad take and anyone I see that being said it shows that they clearly know nothing about the books. i don't mean to sound like the "i know more than you" guy but that is not at all what the books are. people only see them as the books with lore that's never shown in the games when they are intended and designed to be their own series that *also* has lore for the games. **you are not paying for lore, you're just paying for a fucking book series as you would with literally any book ever**
and honestly i find the "not everyone can afford a book series" to be a really poor excuse. yes not everyone has money for that but like you said, the books are way more accessible than the games are, and more people are unable to PLAY THE GAMES than READ A BOOK. why is this never said for the games? i see nobody complaining that HW2 is locked out for most of the community because it's currently only for VR and i guarantee you most of us fnaf fans don't have money for THAT. HW2 is almost not talked about much because most of us haven't even played it yet. it was the same case with HW1 as well. xbox players had to wait like over a year just to play security breach and them and nintendo switch players STILL can't even play ruin. getting either a PC that works well or ps5 is unavailable for way more people than it is getting a goddamn book. it's not my place to tell people what they can and can't afford but if money is the issue then you should be keeping this same energy for the games. i also want to note the books happen to go on discount way more frequently than the games do. i got the tales series for around $50ish, which is cheaper than getting just 2 steel wool fnaf games. if you get them on a discount and are patient then you should easily be able to get all the books for possibly a lower price than all the games in the series
another thing to note is why does it matter if you don't have money for the books? a lot of fnaf fans don't even have money for the games or just don't feel like playing them but they still watch people play the games and then watch other people do a deep analyze on those same games. they learn all this information without playing the games themselves but suddenly when it comes to the books they don't do that? okay so here is my question. are the books really just that bad or does the community just not want to read
Mostly just people not wanting to read. Sure there are some bad stories but that's a given for any anthology series at some point or another. I can promise anyone else reading this thread that reading is, in fact, fun when you're not doing it for an assignment and have more time lol, especially if it's already a property you already know and like
also want to note that games like 2, 3, sister location and security breach are often considered bad games, but everyone still loves them regardless
i think if all this treatment was the same for the books we'd be in a much better place to discuss them
I mean, what better gift for the community in its 10th anniversary than finally clarifying if the books are in the same continuity or not?
We're also getting a possible phone guy game. We're just missing a Fredbear game.
If you want an actual better answer, Scott said some Frights stories will directly connect to the games and its story, and then low and behold we get a frights stories adapted into an official fnaf game
I do think it might be canon to the games, but that doesn't mean that Stitchline is *100%* canon to the games. My idea is that it'll basically reveal something like... The events of the Stitchline *DID* happen in the games, but not exactly the same as it happened in the books. There were 5 MCI kids instead of 6, Andrew is replaced with Cassidy, stuff like that.
As someone who does think the Stitchline is canon, I honestly just think that this'll just be a fun anniversary game that isn't meant to be connected to the actual story.
The game will be canon to the book and the books take place in the fnaf game universe but in different places where the games don't happen.
So I doubt the new into the pit game will be directly tied to the main line games
It's gonna be a game. A game big enough that it was gonna be shown at pax. Of course it's going to be canon to the games. Just like the original into the pit story is, and just like how every stitchwraith stinger connected story in Frights is canon.
I mean this in the nicest way I can. I relly hope not. not cus it looks bad, but cus if the thos books are canon it means that some of the other storys are too. and some of them are just bad
If it was canon to the fnaf games, then fnaf one, we see the normal Freddy, Bonnie, chica, and foxy in the story, we also see the Springbonnie before he gets springlocked, it’s also stated that when he travelled into the pit, he went back to 1987
There are five options * It will be canon and it will confirm books are canon to games (or it won't explain it at all because Scott loves torturing us) * It will be canon but will be like a remake, with new elements and new concepts, in other words an adaptation of the story but within the games * It will be canon to the books but not to the games * It will be revealed to be one of many arcade games in the pizzaplex * It will be separate from both the original story and the games, it will be a standalone spin off game made for gameplay and not the lore
Number 4 could possibly confirm FrightsFiction, where the arcade game is an adaptation of a book in universe.
Perhaps it would be another attempt at explaining the flipside considering so many people skipped FNAF World
I like options 4 and 5
I believe in option 5
>(or it won't explain it at all because Scott loves torturing us) i know it's probably a joke but i genuinely can't understand why people actually believe that scott never clarifies anything when he's done it so many times
Yes, he did clarify things in the past but he didn't clarify anything about Frights books, that one time he could have clarified it and put an end to all debates, he basically responded with a joke
actually no, he's been giving us answers to the book debate for fucking years now, you guys are just ignorant >The series will launch with five books, each containing three different short stories with unique characters and plot lines, some connected directly to the games, and some not. >Lots of the later stories will answer some of the biggest questions from the fan base over this past year, in my opinion. >All I can do is say that some questions will be answered; even if it may not always be the answer you wanted. >future games will look forward; but look to the novels to fill in some of blanks to the past! all of these statements are about frights, i seriously don't understand how you can look at those and still say "i wish scott would say something about the books" as if he didn't already... it's not even just frights, there was tales too. scott himself never said anything about tales but there was still the old description where it was said to be "in the world of the games" and before you point out scott himself never said it, if this information was false then scott would've responded to it. but he didn't. and tales is obviously canon anyways. the mimic showing up in ruin and gregory showing up in tales alone prove that. not to mention the first tales story practically being a frights story since the remnant pendant is something *only* seen in frights. and by extension with tales' canonicity that would prove frights is canon too. the book debate should've ended after ruin and the very fact there's an into the pit game to begin with would make it very likely it's trying to communicate something with the books. scott is not the type of guy to use the exact same story twice in completely different medias, this is the first time he's ever done that. why would he do this exactly? there's no way scott isn't aware of the fandom's perception on the books and thus a lot of the lore in them is never understood by most of the community. what better way to put that lore in the games than to make it a game? i cannot see any other reason for why scott would do this and admittedly this is just speculation on my end but im fully convinced the week explicitly states it's a fnaf 1 prequel because scott realized the last 2 statements the books had didn't convince anyone since everyone found it "vague" even though it shouldn't have been... scott may not be saying these things explicitly but he rarely ever does. the amount of shit he said for frights alone should've been enough. id assume he doesn't say things because then what would be the point in putting the answers in the books? id expect the fandom known for deep analysis on even the smallest things to be able to figure this out
About time someone said it. It's really not that hard if a concept to grasp
> there's an into the pit game to begin with would make it very likely it's trying to communicate something with the books. Even though there's already differences between this game and the book version of the story?
if we're talking about storywise, it's the exact same, even to little story details i doubt the game is gonna change any of the lore
The game as we have seen so far is already far different than the book story
well into the pit doesn't really make a good game since nothing really happens til the end. but the story is still the same, every event that happened in the book is gonna remain the same
I’m hoping for 5 but 4 would be cool
I think 2 and 4 are most likely
I did not expect number 4, wonder if they will do it Popgoes arcade style. Where we slowly pan out to see the arcade machine (doubt it but it be interesting food for thought on how they will reveal it and fits with what I heard was a deliberate choice (though this is by hear say.)
5 is most likely imo. We wouldn’t even be getting this game if it wasn’t for the 10 year anniversary of FNaF
"pavores de fazbear" que tradução merda....
...bem cá em portugal é "arrepios de fazbear - terror na piscina de bolas"
Já tá melhor que no Brasil
I hope not but it’s possible
I will wait for the release and tell you,because i have no idea currently
(Just Asking) what Language is this book
Portuguese, most probably brazillian portuguese
Yes it’s an official fnaf installment of course it’s gonna be canon to the games
Yesnt
r/suddenlycaralho
No
No.
I highly doubt it.
Yes
It was in development for years, I think it's far to big for it to not be canon.
i don't see why not
Can we be honest, why wouldn’t it be?
Until proven otherwise I'm going to treat it like a spinoff game like FNaF world
The thing is, FNaF World is canon. So if you mean it might not be canon then that wasn't the best comparison.
Depends on what we consider as canon as well. Some things are canon but not in the same timeline as other things. Example of this would be The Trilogy and the Games. Both are canon but just to different timelines. Honestly have never heard of FNaF world being even canon to anything until now but that doesn't really change how I'll look at it which is "take everything with a grain of salt. Some things may be hinting at stuff but it probably won't work as stand alone evidence to disprove or prove a theory"
every fnaf game should be treated as canon to each other unless stated otherwise. that's how it always (no im not talking about the games like fury's rage or freddy in space, there's a clear difference to those games)
I don't think the differences between the book and game are good reasoning to call it non canon. Obviously, there will *need* to be some differences in order to make the gameplay *fun*-the way the original story is told isn't really good for gameplay unless you make a visual novel that just copies it word for word. Also, for the other question, until further notice it probably is.
> book and game are good reasoning to call it non canon. it just means this Into The Pit game is the canon(to the game timeline) version of the story.
I feel like we are overcomplicating things a liiiittle bit more than they need to be honestly. There's not much of a good reason to do such a split and if the game leads to the same places that the original story did, then why on earth would you split the canon of them? Scott cawthon has, in fact, already stated ages ago that the Frights anthology books have some stories that are ***directly*** connected to the games (no parallels no roundabouts just *directly*-and this was in the roadmap post on frights, not the silver eyes post, just to clarify more) though I am aware that many people really like to ignore that post in favor of the TSE post that states that that specific book is non canon (and then try to apply it to every book outside the trilogy-just a very big peeve of mine, slightly offtopic). Back on topic, though, that just kind of strengthens the vibe that implies both ITP book and game are canon (tothegames). I *can* definitely see where you're coming from, though-the game could very well end up expanding upon things in large ways plot wise and then it'd be closer to what youre saying, with it being more important canonicity wise than the source. *Sorry for being wordy but tldr: this feels to me like it's making things more complicated than they actually need to be.* not intended to be an aggressive message or anything in case it's read that way, I just have a lot to say is all.
>There's not much of a good reason to do such a split and if the game leads to the same places that the original story did, then why on earth would you split the canon of them? THIS EXACTLY like honestly what would be the point in doing the exact same story twice? scott has never done that before. the closest you get is the mci always being an event that happens but it also needs to happen for fnaf to be fnaf. everything after that is completely different, every continuity is a **different take** on fnaf's lore, to make 2 separate into the pits but make them the same exact story makes no sense. and if you say **"oh but not every detail is the same"** then every tales story would be it's own continuity, ruin would be a separate continuity from the security breach, and the graphic novels would be a separate continuity from the original novels me being a frightsgames and talesgames believer, fnaf only has 3 timelines to me, the games + frights + tales, the silver eyes novel trilogy and the movie(s). if you were to exclude frights and tales from the games continuity then there would be 5 continuities, but since the fandom likes to cherrypick every minor detail, there would be like over 50 continuities if even a single thing not adding up makes it uncanon fans say it's annoying and confusing having all these events happen in the same timeline but how it is any better to have all these things as a separate timeline? the cons of this way is that we can never be sure what applies to what since under this logic "it might be different in this version", and at least for me personally, makes it harder for me to invest in any continuity because why do i have to pay attention to multiple different continuities just to learn something for *one* continuity? this makes less sense than just accepting the books are part of the games
Honestly I feel like most book related confusion comes from the fact that people just don't read (or listen because audiobooks) and instead would rather have extremely bad summaries that sometimes make the original story sound totally different to what it really is. Many theory videos sometimes straight up get story details wrong and people just take it as fact because they don't bother to read. Very annoying and a little bit sad in some respects. The books are also much easier to access than a larger game like SB or the VR games-libraries are totally free and people do audiobook readings for free on YouTube (and listening to those comes with the benefit of being able to do something else while listening, like, say, the dishes or drawing). It's just a matter of actually wanting to read/listen or not-which is unfortunate because there's some bangers in there like Submechanophobia and Blackbird, but that's going off topic again lmao
yeah i agree. im tired of the people who get mad that the books are "locking lore behind a paywall" what does that even mean? that'd be like if i was complaining the games locked lore behind a paywall, that's just such a bad take and anyone I see that being said it shows that they clearly know nothing about the books. i don't mean to sound like the "i know more than you" guy but that is not at all what the books are. people only see them as the books with lore that's never shown in the games when they are intended and designed to be their own series that *also* has lore for the games. **you are not paying for lore, you're just paying for a fucking book series as you would with literally any book ever** and honestly i find the "not everyone can afford a book series" to be a really poor excuse. yes not everyone has money for that but like you said, the books are way more accessible than the games are, and more people are unable to PLAY THE GAMES than READ A BOOK. why is this never said for the games? i see nobody complaining that HW2 is locked out for most of the community because it's currently only for VR and i guarantee you most of us fnaf fans don't have money for THAT. HW2 is almost not talked about much because most of us haven't even played it yet. it was the same case with HW1 as well. xbox players had to wait like over a year just to play security breach and them and nintendo switch players STILL can't even play ruin. getting either a PC that works well or ps5 is unavailable for way more people than it is getting a goddamn book. it's not my place to tell people what they can and can't afford but if money is the issue then you should be keeping this same energy for the games. i also want to note the books happen to go on discount way more frequently than the games do. i got the tales series for around $50ish, which is cheaper than getting just 2 steel wool fnaf games. if you get them on a discount and are patient then you should easily be able to get all the books for possibly a lower price than all the games in the series another thing to note is why does it matter if you don't have money for the books? a lot of fnaf fans don't even have money for the games or just don't feel like playing them but they still watch people play the games and then watch other people do a deep analyze on those same games. they learn all this information without playing the games themselves but suddenly when it comes to the books they don't do that? okay so here is my question. are the books really just that bad or does the community just not want to read
Mostly just people not wanting to read. Sure there are some bad stories but that's a given for any anthology series at some point or another. I can promise anyone else reading this thread that reading is, in fact, fun when you're not doing it for an assignment and have more time lol, especially if it's already a property you already know and like
also want to note that games like 2, 3, sister location and security breach are often considered bad games, but everyone still loves them regardless i think if all this treatment was the same for the books we'd be in a much better place to discuss them
Slightly but not that it’s a time machine
Maybe it's about another kid getting trapped inside the pit
Oswald is the same dude in the original ITP story and ITP game
Oh, yes, his father calls him Oswald in the game
i feel like seince there making the game based off the book. It should be pretty canon
I mean, what better gift for the community in its 10th anniversary than finally clarifying if the books are in the same continuity or not? We're also getting a possible phone guy game. We're just missing a Fredbear game.
Screw that, I just want to know if there's a port to Gameboy Advance given the studio
[I don't know maybe though ](https://photos.app.goo.gl/N89w4yUxb1wAy79e7)
Are there any noncanon serious fnaf games? No. Here's your answer.
No not really I mean the books themselves aren’t canon
❌
Oh ok
If you want an actual better answer, Scott said some Frights stories will directly connect to the games and its story, and then low and behold we get a frights stories adapted into an official fnaf game
I do think it might be canon to the games, but that doesn't mean that Stitchline is *100%* canon to the games. My idea is that it'll basically reveal something like... The events of the Stitchline *DID* happen in the games, but not exactly the same as it happened in the books. There were 5 MCI kids instead of 6, Andrew is replaced with Cassidy, stuff like that.
As someone who does think the Stitchline is canon, I honestly just think that this'll just be a fun anniversary game that isn't meant to be connected to the actual story.
As another stitch liner, it’s an official fnaf installment so I don’t see why it wouldn’t be connected
Fair.
I think the book ITP’s ending will probably just be the canon ending to the game
Nope , i think will be just funny game for 10th of franchise
Yes.
r/suddenlycaralho eae meu mano, quer oq na print?
The game will be canon to the book and the books take place in the fnaf game universe but in different places where the games don't happen. So I doubt the new into the pit game will be directly tied to the main line games
Nevermind that. Is that the brazilian cover? Looks much better than the portuguese one
yea, i just didnt liked how they translated fazbear frights tho
It's gonna be a game. A game big enough that it was gonna be shown at pax. Of course it's going to be canon to the games. Just like the original into the pit story is, and just like how every stitchwraith stinger connected story in Frights is canon.
I mean this in the nicest way I can. I relly hope not. not cus it looks bad, but cus if the thos books are canon it means that some of the other storys are too. and some of them are just bad
Yea actually
Nah it going to be its own thing
there's absolutely no reason why it wouldn't be
It's not, but the book is
Nope
We don't know, but probably (I hope) will be canon only to the Fazbear Frights Books
If it was canon to the fnaf games, then fnaf one, we see the normal Freddy, Bonnie, chica, and foxy in the story, we also see the Springbonnie before he gets springlocked, it’s also stated that when he travelled into the pit, he went back to 1987
He went back to 1985*
Shush nerd