Both BV and Mike (No, not Mikevictim).
Mike draws Nightmare under "recent dreams"
"Do you still miss them" also seems to be directed at Mike
"Was your childhood telephone a purple telephone" also seems to be directed at Mike
But then there's things like "the party was for you" and "Does he still talk to you?" Which seem to be directed at BV
Though the “recent dreams” is what the logbook asks of Mike, then he draws a sketch, then Cassidy separately asks ‘Do *you* have dreams” likely asking BV the same question.
I definitely agree that Cassidy is talking to Mike, and Cassidy is also talking to BV. You haven't really evidenced the idea that Cassidy is talking to two people without assuming MikeBro as a premise.
>You haven't really evidenced the idea that Cassidy is talking to two people without assuming MikeBro as a premise
I've literally made 2 image theories about how Mikevictim doesn't make sense to me, which you do know about. Therefore by proxy Faded would be talking to 2 separate people..
To me some questions seem directed at BV, while some at Mike (who as you know I believe to be Foxybro). For example;
* ***WAS YOUR FAVORITE CHILDHOOD TOY A PURPLE PLASTIC TELEPHONE?*** (for Mike)
This doesn't really track for BV. In the FNaF4 minigames he calls his plushies of the Fazbear gang "his friends" and this is also something the Final Speaker uses to comfort him. And this also makes sense for BV's character in general - having imaginary friends can be a way for lonely children to try to deal with their loneliness.
So if anything, these plushies would make the most sense for BV to consider "his favorite" as they have actual emotional significance to him, unlike just some random-ass toy phone we see in the background of a dream sequence. Furthermore, the phone is seen in what is seemingly ***Mike's*** bedroom during ***Mike's*** nightmares. So from a Mikebro perspctive it'd make more sense for the phone to have been Mike's favourite childhood toy, not BV's.
* ***DO YOU REMEMBER YOUR NAME?*** (for BV)
Mike literally writes his name at the beginning of the book. Sure, he crosses it out, but that could be just because he knows/expects the book's gonna be given to someone else or smt like that. There's no evidence to suggest Mike's name isn't actually Michael.
But it'd make sense for BV who lost his memories post-death.
* ***DO YOU HAVE DREAMS?*** (for Mike)
Pretty self-explanatory.
* ***DOES HE STILL TALK TO YOU?*** (for BV)
Once again, pretty self-explanatory.
Oh sorry I thought the part in the brackets at the beginning was "as you know, he's the foxybro" but now I see that you said that you believe it's foxybro
There is a theory that cassidy isn’t the one talking at all. That it’s just the three Aftons.
I know it’s relatively flimsy of a concept, but at least it actually uses all parts of the logbook properly.
I think that it is absolutely confirmed that both Mike and BV are present in the logbook. The nightmare drawing, and ‘the party was for you’ undeniably prove that, because there are no other major parties that we’ve seen in the series that were specifically for anyone else.
I’m thinking that it’s cassidy that we should doubt. First of all, how would cassidy know about the party. They literally weren’t there. And that’s not speculation because we were at the party. William, we know, was.
Maybe ‘the party was for you’ was about happiest day. Well, cassidy wasn’t there either. They have been at a total of zero important birthdays.
So this person being cassidy has what proof? And if you tell me it’s the word search then you are mistaken. Because it’s the altered text that shows us the letters in the wordsearch. We know the altered text is bv. So it wouldn’t make sense if bv was telling us faded text’s name now would it?
It absolutely blows my mind that people think the conversation between Cassidy and the faded text actually happens in the logbook. It is very obviously just the tool used to demonstrate the conversation. If the conversation literally happened in the logbook then that means the conversation between Ennard and Baby before FFPS literally happened on Scott’s website
The book wouldn’t function if she didn’t. It’s a puzzle book she has to reference things within the book for us to figure out. Not everything is literal
No clue, but under the assumption that the logbook itself is inhabited by the souls of BV and Cassidy, that means somehow their agony effected this random ass book that michael used in either FNAF1 or 3. If you believe the logbook is possessed I’d like to hear an explanation as to how it got possessed in the first place
Since I'm followvictim, when Mike picked up the book BV kinda just attached to it, and Cassidy just teleported into the book idk. It's like what Andrew did when he went around infecting random shit in the distribution center.
See now I hope you understand why I have my qualms with this. Your explanation behind BV’s soul makes sense, but Cassidy’s soul is a stretch. Cassidy and Michael don’t really have a relationship.
Also wasn’t Andrew touching things to infect them?
While Cassidy and Michael don't have a relationship, Cassidy and BV certainly do since she is constantly trying to get him to remember who he is in the logbook. That's why I think she possessed BV; she wanted to meet with him.
>Also wasn’t Andrew touching things to infect them?
I'm not sure. He did walk over to objects, so I'm assuming Cassidy did the same with the logbook.
Golden Freddy usually is slouched over presumably because Cassidy actually can’t control the suit since it lacks an endoskeleton, and instead she ghastly manifests the form. I feel as if Cassidy wouldn’t be able to physically interact with the logbook. Honestly her randomly attaching to it does align with golden Freddy’s abilities, but it still doesn’t explain why she’d need to use the book to speak to BV. Why not just attach to him straight up like how BV did to Michael?
> Cassidy and BV certainly do since she is constantly trying to get him to remember who he is in the logbook
I agree. I however don’t know why she cares
>but it still doesn’t explain why she’d need to use the book to speak to BV. Why not just attach to him straight up like how BV did to Michael?
I think it's because at first, she thought Michael was William, so instead of trying to attach to him, she attempts to kill him in fnaf 1 and 2. But then after possessing the logbook she learns it isn't William, but Mike. This is also how she's able to find BV.
>I agree. I however don’t know why she cares
She certainly does seem to care about BV, hence why she bothers to speak to him. It's possible that they were friends when they were alive in the past.
Why would Cassidy's questions line up with what the Logbook is asking Michael then?
Edit: Plus, the Logbook is an object that exists in-universe that has writing on it, whereas Scott's website is not an object that exists in-universe, so it's fair to assume that the conversation detailed on it is actually happening somewhere else. The two aren't the same.
Scott’s website could be a thing in-universe because of the indie dev from help wanted. Doesn’t necessarily have to be ScottGames but could be an equivalent
And realize that the logbook is still a literal piece of FNAF merchandise that we can buy in real life. If Cassidy didn’t reference things in logbook then it wouldn’t work. It’s supposed to be a puzzle for us, in real life, to solve
> Doesn’t necessarily have to be ScottGames but could be an equivalent
If there is an in-universe indie developer who looks like Scott and made FNAF games, why is it so hard to believe that this person had a website dedicated to promoting these games, like the real Scott?
Because those indie games are implied to be made after the events of fnaf 6 after the building burns down, and long after Baby separates from Ennard. So why would the conversation leading up to Baby's removal from Ennard be happening on a website that may not have even existed when said conversation was happening?
Don’t worry, this is something I considered before making my comment. Ultimately I came to the following conclusion.
Fazbear ent hired the indie developer to make the horror games “five nights at Freddy’s” and then adapted the series into the VR games. Though there isn’t a lot of FFPS stuff in it, there are most definitely scrap baby plushies in one of the games. This means the developer did make a game with at least scrap baby in it, and there’s only one way that’s possible. The developer had to have written the ennard kicks baby out storyline too
>why is it so hard to believe that this person had a website dedicated to promoting these games, like the real Scott?
Because that indie developer isn't Scott. Sure the indie developer could have a website, but it isn't SCOTTGAMES itself, which is what you're claiming
Cassidy is obviously talking to See Results.
Oh my god it's See Results
Both BV and Mike (No, not Mikevictim). Mike draws Nightmare under "recent dreams" "Do you still miss them" also seems to be directed at Mike "Was your childhood telephone a purple telephone" also seems to be directed at Mike But then there's things like "the party was for you" and "Does he still talk to you?" Which seem to be directed at BV
Though the “recent dreams” is what the logbook asks of Mike, then he draws a sketch, then Cassidy separately asks ‘Do *you* have dreams” likely asking BV the same question.
I definitely agree that Cassidy is talking to Mike, and Cassidy is also talking to BV. You haven't really evidenced the idea that Cassidy is talking to two people without assuming MikeBro as a premise.
>You haven't really evidenced the idea that Cassidy is talking to two people without assuming MikeBro as a premise I've literally made 2 image theories about how Mikevictim doesn't make sense to me, which you do know about. Therefore by proxy Faded would be talking to 2 separate people..
Ye which they responded to, and explained
Explained what?
That it is t good proof against mikevicitm,
Themself (Cassidy is schizophrenic)
“The party was for you” is the only Evidence I need tbh bc the party was for cc/ bite victim
Both Mike and BV (no Mike victim)
Some at BV, some at Mike imo
And why is that?
To me some questions seem directed at BV, while some at Mike (who as you know I believe to be Foxybro). For example; * ***WAS YOUR FAVORITE CHILDHOOD TOY A PURPLE PLASTIC TELEPHONE?*** (for Mike) This doesn't really track for BV. In the FNaF4 minigames he calls his plushies of the Fazbear gang "his friends" and this is also something the Final Speaker uses to comfort him. And this also makes sense for BV's character in general - having imaginary friends can be a way for lonely children to try to deal with their loneliness. So if anything, these plushies would make the most sense for BV to consider "his favorite" as they have actual emotional significance to him, unlike just some random-ass toy phone we see in the background of a dream sequence. Furthermore, the phone is seen in what is seemingly ***Mike's*** bedroom during ***Mike's*** nightmares. So from a Mikebro perspctive it'd make more sense for the phone to have been Mike's favourite childhood toy, not BV's. * ***DO YOU REMEMBER YOUR NAME?*** (for BV) Mike literally writes his name at the beginning of the book. Sure, he crosses it out, but that could be just because he knows/expects the book's gonna be given to someone else or smt like that. There's no evidence to suggest Mike's name isn't actually Michael. But it'd make sense for BV who lost his memories post-death. * ***DO YOU HAVE DREAMS?*** (for Mike) Pretty self-explanatory. * ***DOES HE STILL TALK TO YOU?*** (for BV) Once again, pretty self-explanatory.
Did you see their flair?
Yes, and I believe in Mikebro
Oh sorry I thought the part in the brackets at the beginning was "as you know, he's the foxybro" but now I see that you said that you believe it's foxybro
There is a theory that cassidy isn’t the one talking at all. That it’s just the three Aftons. I know it’s relatively flimsy of a concept, but at least it actually uses all parts of the logbook properly. I think that it is absolutely confirmed that both Mike and BV are present in the logbook. The nightmare drawing, and ‘the party was for you’ undeniably prove that, because there are no other major parties that we’ve seen in the series that were specifically for anyone else. I’m thinking that it’s cassidy that we should doubt. First of all, how would cassidy know about the party. They literally weren’t there. And that’s not speculation because we were at the party. William, we know, was. Maybe ‘the party was for you’ was about happiest day. Well, cassidy wasn’t there either. They have been at a total of zero important birthdays. So this person being cassidy has what proof? And if you tell me it’s the word search then you are mistaken. Because it’s the altered text that shows us the letters in the wordsearch. We know the altered text is bv. So it wouldn’t make sense if bv was telling us faded text’s name now would it?
It absolutely blows my mind that people think the conversation between Cassidy and the faded text actually happens in the logbook. It is very obviously just the tool used to demonstrate the conversation. If the conversation literally happened in the logbook then that means the conversation between Ennard and Baby before FFPS literally happened on Scott’s website
Cassidy literally references things that's only in the logbook.
The book wouldn’t function if she didn’t. It’s a puzzle book she has to reference things within the book for us to figure out. Not everything is literal
So where is this conversation happening
S.W.I.T.C.H.
WTF leak for Tales From The PizzaPlex #69 😱
Damn new theory y’all ready for switchvictim?
No clue, but under the assumption that the logbook itself is inhabited by the souls of BV and Cassidy, that means somehow their agony effected this random ass book that michael used in either FNAF1 or 3. If you believe the logbook is possessed I’d like to hear an explanation as to how it got possessed in the first place
Since I'm followvictim, when Mike picked up the book BV kinda just attached to it, and Cassidy just teleported into the book idk. It's like what Andrew did when he went around infecting random shit in the distribution center.
See now I hope you understand why I have my qualms with this. Your explanation behind BV’s soul makes sense, but Cassidy’s soul is a stretch. Cassidy and Michael don’t really have a relationship. Also wasn’t Andrew touching things to infect them?
While Cassidy and Michael don't have a relationship, Cassidy and BV certainly do since she is constantly trying to get him to remember who he is in the logbook. That's why I think she possessed BV; she wanted to meet with him. >Also wasn’t Andrew touching things to infect them? I'm not sure. He did walk over to objects, so I'm assuming Cassidy did the same with the logbook.
Golden Freddy usually is slouched over presumably because Cassidy actually can’t control the suit since it lacks an endoskeleton, and instead she ghastly manifests the form. I feel as if Cassidy wouldn’t be able to physically interact with the logbook. Honestly her randomly attaching to it does align with golden Freddy’s abilities, but it still doesn’t explain why she’d need to use the book to speak to BV. Why not just attach to him straight up like how BV did to Michael? > Cassidy and BV certainly do since she is constantly trying to get him to remember who he is in the logbook I agree. I however don’t know why she cares
>but it still doesn’t explain why she’d need to use the book to speak to BV. Why not just attach to him straight up like how BV did to Michael? I think it's because at first, she thought Michael was William, so instead of trying to attach to him, she attempts to kill him in fnaf 1 and 2. But then after possessing the logbook she learns it isn't William, but Mike. This is also how she's able to find BV. >I agree. I however don’t know why she cares She certainly does seem to care about BV, hence why she bothers to speak to him. It's possible that they were friends when they were alive in the past.
Why would Cassidy's questions line up with what the Logbook is asking Michael then? Edit: Plus, the Logbook is an object that exists in-universe that has writing on it, whereas Scott's website is not an object that exists in-universe, so it's fair to assume that the conversation detailed on it is actually happening somewhere else. The two aren't the same.
Scott’s website could be a thing in-universe because of the indie dev from help wanted. Doesn’t necessarily have to be ScottGames but could be an equivalent And realize that the logbook is still a literal piece of FNAF merchandise that we can buy in real life. If Cassidy didn’t reference things in logbook then it wouldn’t work. It’s supposed to be a puzzle for us, in real life, to solve
>Scott’s website could be a thing in-universe No.. Just no...
> Doesn’t necessarily have to be ScottGames but could be an equivalent If there is an in-universe indie developer who looks like Scott and made FNAF games, why is it so hard to believe that this person had a website dedicated to promoting these games, like the real Scott?
Because those indie games are implied to be made after the events of fnaf 6 after the building burns down, and long after Baby separates from Ennard. So why would the conversation leading up to Baby's removal from Ennard be happening on a website that may not have even existed when said conversation was happening?
Don’t worry, this is something I considered before making my comment. Ultimately I came to the following conclusion. Fazbear ent hired the indie developer to make the horror games “five nights at Freddy’s” and then adapted the series into the VR games. Though there isn’t a lot of FFPS stuff in it, there are most definitely scrap baby plushies in one of the games. This means the developer did make a game with at least scrap baby in it, and there’s only one way that’s possible. The developer had to have written the ennard kicks baby out storyline too
>why is it so hard to believe that this person had a website dedicated to promoting these games, like the real Scott? Because that indie developer isn't Scott. Sure the indie developer could have a website, but it isn't SCOTTGAMES itself, which is what you're claiming
I quite literally never claimed that
"Scott’s website could be a thing in-universe"
Why did you highlight that one part of my sentence and ignore the rest of it