VixenMangleTheFox wrote:

This here theory is for those of whom still think Fredbear did the bite of ‘87.


So, we all know what the bite of ’87 was, correct? After all, Phone Guy tells us a little bit about it in the first game. "But then there was the bite of ‘87. Yeah. It’s amazing that the human body can live without the frontal lobe, y'know?“

He never told us who did it. However, there are two finalists: Mangle and (ugh) Fredbear. Now, I'm not saying Mangle did it, although that is my belief. I'm just saying that Fredbear did NOT do it.

Now, we know that the bite happened in 1987, the year FNaF2 takes place. It is unknown when FNaF4 takes place, but it probably happened before 1987. For those who think it happens at the same time as FNaF2, look at the minigame where the ”bite" occurs. When the child was put in Fredbear's mouth, the mouth closed on the kid's skull, crushing the child's head, rather than taking off the frontal lobe. I know taht the graphics are sooo accurate, but if it was the frontal lobe, it would most likely look different. By the way, would Scott really throw this at us 2 games after people were close to a consensus? (if you don't know what that word means, look it up :I) This can't be the bite of '87. This was just a tragic accident, or even just a dream!

Nightwing412 wrote:

VixenMangleTheFox wrote:

This here theory is for those of whom still think Fredbear did the bite of ‘87.


So, we all know what the bite of ’87 was, correct? After all, Phone Guy tells us a little bit about it in the first game. "But then there was the bite of ‘87. Yeah. It’s amazing that the human body can live without the frontal lobe, y'know?“

He never told us who did it. However, there are two finalists: Mangle and (ugh) Fredbear. Now, I'm not saying Mangle did it, although that is my belief. I'm just saying that Fredbear did NOT do it.

Now, we know that the bite happened in 1987, the year FNaF2 takes place. It is unknown when FNaF4 takes place, but it probably happened before 1987. For those who think it happens at the same time as FNaF2, look at the minigame where the ”bite" occurs. When the child was put in Fredbear's mouth, the mouth closed on the kid's skull, crushing the child's head, rather than taking off the frontal lobe. I know taht the graphics are sooo accurate, but if it was the frontal lobe, it would most likely look different. By the way, would Scott really throw this at us 2 games after people were close to a consensus? (if you don't know what that word means, look it up :I) This can't be the bite of '87. This was just a tragic accident, or even just a dream!

FNAF4 took place at the FIRST Freddy Fazbear's Pizza. :3 For one, Spring Bonnie and Fredbear were the only animatronics there. The purple ‘shadows’ can't be shadows, what if the child in FNAF4 can see spirits? Nobody seems to notice the purple animatronic shadows, while the kid seems terrified of them. Also, Shadow/Purple Freddy and Shadow Bonnie are likely spirits, and what color can they be? Black……. or dark purple,when brightened (( At least for Shadow Freddy )). And what color are the ‘shadows’? Purple.

Nightwing412 wrote:

WilliamWP wrote:

Nextor wrote:

Also, Mangle DID do the Bite of ‘87 because of one obvious fact: Mangle isn’t in the first game. Think about it. If Foxy had caused the Bite of '87, he would have been scrapped and thus NOT IN THE FIRST GAME IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Mangle didn't do the Bite of ‘87. Fredbear caused the Bite. Scott said that when fans were asking for a FNAF 5, he said there wouldn’t be anymore canon FNAF games saying that the story was complete for the game. So, obviously the Bite that happened at the end of Five Nights at Freddy's 4 was the Bite of '87.

No, as FNAF4 logically and canonically CAN'T be the Bite of 87.And did Scott literally SAY Fnaf4 is the bite? :3

WilliamWP wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

WilliamWP wrote:

Nextor wrote:

Also, Mangle DID do the Bite of ‘87 because of one obvious fact: Mangle isn’t in the first game. Think about it. If Foxy had caused the Bite of '87, he would have been scrapped and thus NOT IN THE FIRST GAME IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Mangle didn't do the Bite of ‘87. Fredbear caused the Bite. Scott said that when fans were asking for a FNAF 5, he said there wouldn’t be anymore canon FNAF games saying that the story was complete for the game. So, obviously the Bite that happened at the end of Five Nights at Freddy's 4 was the Bite of '87.

No, as FNAF4 logically and canonically CAN'T be the Bite of 87.And did Scott literally SAY Fnaf4 is the bite? :3

He did say that the story was complete. So it MUST'VE been the Bite at the end of FNAF 4

VixenMangleTheFox wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

VixenMangleTheFox wrote:

This here theory is for those of whom still think Fredbear did the bite of ‘87.


So, we all know what the bite of ’87 was, correct? After all, Phone Guy tells us a little bit about it in the first game. "But then there was the bite of ‘87. Yeah. It’s amazing that the human body can live without the frontal lobe, y'know?“

He never told us who did it. However, there are two finalists: Mangle and (ugh) Fredbear. Now, I'm not saying Mangle did it, although that is my belief. I'm just saying that Fredbear did NOT do it.

Now, we know that the bite happened in 1987, the year FNaF2 takes place. It is unknown when FNaF4 takes place, but it probably happened before 1987. For those who think it happens at the same time as FNaF2, look at the minigame where the ”bite" occurs. When the child was put in Fredbear's mouth, the mouth closed on the kid's skull, crushing the child's head, rather than taking off the frontal lobe. I know taht the graphics are sooo accurate, but if it was the frontal lobe, it would most likely look different. By the way, would Scott really throw this at us 2 games after people were close to a consensus? (if you don't know what that word means, look it up :I) This can't be the bite of '87. This was just a tragic accident, or even just a dream!

FNAF4 took place at the FIRST Freddy Fazbear's Pizza. :3 For one, Spring Bonnie and Fredbear were the only animatronics there. The purple ‘shadows’ can't be shadows, what if the child in FNAF4 can see spirits? Nobody seems to notice the purple animatronic shadows, while the kid seems terrified of them. Also, Shadow/Purple Freddy and Shadow Bonnie are likely spirits, and what color can they be? Black……. or dark purple,when brightened (( At least for Shadow Freddy )). And what color are the ‘shadows’? Purple.

What are you getting at?

Imthebestof2015aa wrote:

I have a question:
Why purple guy killed those 5 children?,I still don't get it,he is a monster.

Nightwing412 wrote:

Imthebestof2015aa wrote:

I have a question:
Why purple guy killed those 5 children?,I still don't get it,he is a monster.

It is possible it wasn't Purple Guy, but a Pink Guy. Look at the man in the Foxy Death minigame and the Take Cake Death minigame, and then look at Purple Guy. Do they really look alike? No, not really. In the moments where children were actually killed, PINK Guy is there, not Purple Guy. Purple Guy is possibly the owner of the first restaurant, and the father of Phone Guy, the child from FNAF4, and the brother who, with his friends, puts the child in Fredbear's mouth.

Nightwing412 wrote:

WilliamWP wrote:

Nextor wrote:

Also, Mangle DID do the Bite of ‘87 because of one obvious fact: Mangle isn’t in the first game. Think about it. If Foxy had caused the Bite of '87, he would have been scrapped and thus NOT IN THE FIRST GAME IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Mangle didn't do the Bite of ‘87. Fredbear caused the Bite. Scott said that when fans were asking for a FNAF 5, he said there wouldn’t be anymore canon FNAF games saying that the story was complete for the game. So, obviously the Bite that happened at the end of Five Nights at Freddy's 4 was the Bite of '87.

No, as FNAF4 logically and canonically CAN'T be the Bite of 87.And did Scott literally SAY Fnaf4 is the bite? :3

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

WilliamWP wrote:

Nextor wrote:

Also, Mangle DID do the Bite of ‘87 because of one obvious fact: Mangle isn’t in the first game. Think about it. If Foxy had caused the Bite of '87, he would have been scrapped and thus NOT IN THE FIRST GAME IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Mangle didn't do the Bite of ‘87. Fredbear caused the Bite. Scott said that when fans were asking for a FNAF 5, he said there wouldn’t be anymore canon FNAF games saying that the story was complete for the game. So, obviously the Bite that happened at the end of Five Nights at Freddy's 4 was the Bite of '87.

No, as FNAF4 logically and canonically CAN'T be the Bite of 87.And did Scott literally SAY Fnaf4 is the bite? :3

Scott doesn't have to outright say it is the bite of 87. Actually it makes sense for it to be in 1987. Do you really believe that a kids restaraunt would survive after TWO bites from an animatronic? And if it was 83, if they had a bite with a stationary animatronic, why would they even think of making them mobile? Now, think about this. Mangle was mangled in 1987, as she was mangled in fnaf 2 which takes place in 1987 for a few weeks in November. How could we see Mangle in the minigames if it takes place in 1983?

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

WilliamWP wrote:

Nextor wrote:

Also, Mangle DID do the Bite of ‘87 because of one obvious fact: Mangle isn’t in the first game. Think about it. If Foxy had caused the Bite of '87, he would have been scrapped and thus NOT IN THE FIRST GAME IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Mangle didn't do the Bite of ‘87. Fredbear caused the Bite. Scott said that when fans were asking for a FNAF 5, he said there wouldn’t be anymore canon FNAF games saying that the story was complete for the game. So, obviously the Bite that happened at the end of Five Nights at Freddy's 4 was the Bite of '87.

No, as FNAF4 logically and canonically CAN'T be the Bite of 87.And did Scott literally SAY Fnaf4 is the bite? :3

Scott doesn't have to outright say it is the bite of 87. Actually it makes sense for it to be in 1987. Do you really believe that a kids restaraunt would survive after TWO bites from an animatronic? And if it was 83, if they had a bite with a stationary animatronic, why would they even think of making them mobile? Now, think about this. Mangle was mangled in 1987, as she was mangled in fnaf 2 which takes place in 1987 for a few weeks in November. How could we see Mangle in the minigames if it takes place in 1983?

And do you think that Fredbear can be in use during the Bite of 87, though Fredbear isn't even IN FNAF2? I know, what if they got rid of Fredbear right after the bite? BUT, the Bite of 87 hasn't happened yet in FNAF2. It would take place at the very end, or just after. BUT, Fredbear isn't in use.

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

WilliamWP wrote:

Nextor wrote:

Also, Mangle DID do the Bite of ‘87 because of one obvious fact: Mangle isn’t in the first game. Think about it. If Foxy had caused the Bite of '87, he would have been scrapped and thus NOT IN THE FIRST GAME IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Mangle didn't do the Bite of ‘87. Fredbear caused the Bite. Scott said that when fans were asking for a FNAF 5, he said there wouldn’t be anymore canon FNAF games saying that the story was complete for the game. So, obviously the Bite that happened at the end of Five Nights at Freddy's 4 was the Bite of '87.

No, as FNAF4 logically and canonically CAN'T be the Bite of 87.And did Scott literally SAY Fnaf4 is the bite? :3

Scott doesn't have to outright say it is the bite of 87. Actually it makes sense for it to be in 1987. Do you really believe that a kids restaraunt would survive after TWO bites from an animatronic? And if it was 83, if they had a bite with a stationary animatronic, why would they even think of making them mobile? Now, think about this. Mangle was mangled in 1987, as she was mangled in fnaf 2 which takes place in 1987 for a few weeks in November. How could we see Mangle in the minigames if it takes place in 1983?

And do you think that Fredbear can be in use during the Bite of 87, though Fredbear isn't even IN FNAF2? I know, what if they got rid of Fredbear right after the bite? BUT, the Bite of 87 hasn't happened yet in FNAF2. It would take place at the very end, or just after. BUT, Fredbear isn't in use.

TWO different restaurants people. Fnaf 2, and the sister location which is the fnaf 4 minigames. That literally explains everything you said.

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

WilliamWP wrote:

Nextor wrote:

Also, Mangle DID do the Bite of ‘87 because of one obvious fact: Mangle isn’t in the first game. Think about it. If Foxy had caused the Bite of '87, he would have been scrapped and thus NOT IN THE FIRST GAME IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Mangle didn't do the Bite of ‘87. Fredbear caused the Bite. Scott said that when fans were asking for a FNAF 5, he said there wouldn’t be anymore canon FNAF games saying that the story was complete for the game. So, obviously the Bite that happened at the end of Five Nights at Freddy's 4 was the Bite of '87.

No, as FNAF4 logically and canonically CAN'T be the Bite of 87.And did Scott literally SAY Fnaf4 is the bite? :3

Scott doesn't have to outright say it is the bite of 87. Actually it makes sense for it to be in 1987. Do you really believe that a kids restaraunt would survive after TWO bites from an animatronic? And if it was 83, if they had a bite with a stationary animatronic, why would they even think of making them mobile? Now, think about this. Mangle was mangled in 1987, as she was mangled in fnaf 2 which takes place in 1987 for a few weeks in November. How could we see Mangle in the minigames if it takes place in 1983?

And do you think that Fredbear can be in use during the Bite of 87, though Fredbear isn't even IN FNAF2? I know, what if they got rid of Fredbear right after the bite? BUT, the Bite of 87 hasn't happened yet in FNAF2. It would take place at the very end, or just after. BUT, Fredbear isn't in use.

TWO different restaurants people. Fnaf 2, and the sister location which is the fnaf 4 minigames. That literally explains everything you said.

Hm. But why would Fredbear be in use at one restaurant but not in the other?

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

WilliamWP wrote:

Nextor wrote:

Also, Mangle DID do the Bite of ‘87 because of one obvious fact: Mangle isn’t in the first game. Think about it. If Foxy had caused the Bite of '87, he would have been scrapped and thus NOT IN THE FIRST GAME IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Mangle didn't do the Bite of ‘87. Fredbear caused the Bite. Scott said that when fans were asking for a FNAF 5, he said there wouldn’t be anymore canon FNAF games saying that the story was complete for the game. So, obviously the Bite that happened at the end of Five Nights at Freddy's 4 was the Bite of '87.

No, as FNAF4 logically and canonically CAN'T be the Bite of 87.And did Scott literally SAY Fnaf4 is the bite? :3

Scott doesn't have to outright say it is the bite of 87. Actually it makes sense for it to be in 1987. Do you really believe that a kids restaraunt would survive after TWO bites from an animatronic? And if it was 83, if they had a bite with a stationary animatronic, why would they even think of making them mobile? Now, think about this. Mangle was mangled in 1987, as she was mangled in fnaf 2 which takes place in 1987 for a few weeks in November. How could we see Mangle in the minigames if it takes place in 1983?

And do you think that Fredbear can be in use during the Bite of 87, though Fredbear isn't even IN FNAF2? I know, what if they got rid of Fredbear right after the bite? BUT, the Bite of 87 hasn't happened yet in FNAF2. It would take place at the very end, or just after. BUT, Fredbear isn't in use.

TWO different restaurants people. Fnaf 2, and the sister location which is the fnaf 4 minigames. That literally explains everything you said.

Hm. But why would Fredbear be in use at one restaurant but not in the other?

Because maybe there is only one Fredbear, and they tried using different animatronics for fnaf 2, so Fredbear wouldn't fit in.

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

WilliamWP wrote:

Nextor wrote:

Also, Mangle DID do the Bite of ‘87 because of one obvious fact: Mangle isn’t in the first game. Think about it. If Foxy had caused the Bite of '87, he would have been scrapped and thus NOT IN THE FIRST GAME IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Mangle didn't do the Bite of ‘87. Fredbear caused the Bite. Scott said that when fans were asking for a FNAF 5, he said there wouldn’t be anymore canon FNAF games saying that the story was complete for the game. So, obviously the Bite that happened at the end of Five Nights at Freddy's 4 was the Bite of '87.

No, as FNAF4 logically and canonically CAN'T be the Bite of 87.And did Scott literally SAY Fnaf4 is the bite? :3

Scott doesn't have to outright say it is the bite of 87. Actually it makes sense for it to be in 1987. Do you really believe that a kids restaraunt would survive after TWO bites from an animatronic? And if it was 83, if they had a bite with a stationary animatronic, why would they even think of making them mobile? Now, think about this. Mangle was mangled in 1987, as she was mangled in fnaf 2 which takes place in 1987 for a few weeks in November. How could we see Mangle in the minigames if it takes place in 1983?

And do you think that Fredbear can be in use during the Bite of 87, though Fredbear isn't even IN FNAF2? I know, what if they got rid of Fredbear right after the bite? BUT, the Bite of 87 hasn't happened yet in FNAF2. It would take place at the very end, or just after. BUT, Fredbear isn't in use.

TWO different restaurants people. Fnaf 2, and the sister location which is the fnaf 4 minigames. That literally explains everything you said.

Hm. But why would Fredbear be in use at one restaurant but not in the other?

Because maybe there is only one Fredbear, and they tried using different animatronics for fnaf 2, so Fredbear wouldn't fit in.

Hm. Maybe the fact that there have been games for the different locations- FNAF 1 was the last, FNAF 2 was the one before FNAF1, and FNAF3 was a horror attraction. But there never was a game for the first restaurant. I have ONE MORE piece of evidence, and you CAN't fight that one

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

WilliamWP wrote:

Nextor wrote:

Also, Mangle DID do the Bite of ‘87 because of one obvious fact: Mangle isn’t in the first game. Think about it. If Foxy had caused the Bite of '87, he would have been scrapped and thus NOT IN THE FIRST GAME IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Mangle didn't do the Bite of ‘87. Fredbear caused the Bite. Scott said that when fans were asking for a FNAF 5, he said there wouldn’t be anymore canon FNAF games saying that the story was complete for the game. So, obviously the Bite that happened at the end of Five Nights at Freddy's 4 was the Bite of '87.

No, as FNAF4 logically and canonically CAN'T be the Bite of 87.And did Scott literally SAY Fnaf4 is the bite? :3

Scott doesn't have to outright say it is the bite of 87. Actually it makes sense for it to be in 1987. Do you really believe that a kids restaraunt would survive after TWO bites from an animatronic? And if it was 83, if they had a bite with a stationary animatronic, why would they even think of making them mobile? Now, think about this. Mangle was mangled in 1987, as she was mangled in fnaf 2 which takes place in 1987 for a few weeks in November. How could we see Mangle in the minigames if it takes place in 1983?

And do you think that Fredbear can be in use during the Bite of 87, though Fredbear isn't even IN FNAF2? I know, what if they got rid of Fredbear right after the bite? BUT, the Bite of 87 hasn't happened yet in FNAF2. It would take place at the very end, or just after. BUT, Fredbear isn't in use.

TWO different restaurants people. Fnaf 2, and the sister location which is the fnaf 4 minigames. That literally explains everything you said.

Hm. But why would Fredbear be in use at one restaurant but not in the other?

Because maybe there is only one Fredbear, and they tried using different animatronics for fnaf 2, so Fredbear wouldn't fit in.

Hm. Maybe the fact that there have been games for the different locations- FNAF 1 was the last, FNAF 2 was the one before FNAF1, and FNAF3 was a horror attraction. But there never was a game for the first restaurant. I have ONE MORE piece of evidence, and you CAN't fight that one

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

WilliamWP wrote:

Nextor wrote:

Also, Mangle DID do the Bite of ‘87 because of one obvious fact: Mangle isn’t in the first game. Think about it. If Foxy had caused the Bite of '87, he would have been scrapped and thus NOT IN THE FIRST GAME IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Mangle didn't do the Bite of ‘87. Fredbear caused the Bite. Scott said that when fans were asking for a FNAF 5, he said there wouldn’t be anymore canon FNAF games saying that the story was complete for the game. So, obviously the Bite that happened at the end of Five Nights at Freddy's 4 was the Bite of '87.

No, as FNAF4 logically and canonically CAN'T be the Bite of 87.And did Scott literally SAY Fnaf4 is the bite? :3

Scott doesn't have to outright say it is the bite of 87. Actually it makes sense for it to be in 1987. Do you really believe that a kids restaraunt would survive after TWO bites from an animatronic? And if it was 83, if they had a bite with a stationary animatronic, why would they even think of making them mobile? Now, think about this. Mangle was mangled in 1987, as she was mangled in fnaf 2 which takes place in 1987 for a few weeks in November. How could we see Mangle in the minigames if it takes place in 1983?

And do you think that Fredbear can be in use during the Bite of 87, though Fredbear isn't even IN FNAF2? I know, what if they got rid of Fredbear right after the bite? BUT, the Bite of 87 hasn't happened yet in FNAF2. It would take place at the very end, or just after. BUT, Fredbear isn't in use.

TWO different restaurants people. Fnaf 2, and the sister location which is the fnaf 4 minigames. That literally explains everything you said.

Hm. But why would Fredbear be in use at one restaurant but not in the other?

Because maybe there is only one Fredbear, and they tried using different animatronics for fnaf 2, so Fredbear wouldn't fit in.

Hm. Maybe the fact that there have been games for the different locations- FNAF 1 was the last, FNAF 2 was the one before FNAF1, and FNAF3 was a horror attraction. But there never was a game for the first restaurant. I have ONE MORE piece of evidence, and you CAN't fight that one

What is it. Because it is logically impossible with my Mangle argument.

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

WilliamWP wrote:

Nextor wrote:

Also, Mangle DID do the Bite of ‘87 because of one obvious fact: Mangle isn’t in the first game. Think about it. If Foxy had caused the Bite of '87, he would have been scrapped and thus NOT IN THE FIRST GAME IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Mangle didn't do the Bite of ‘87. Fredbear caused the Bite. Scott said that when fans were asking for a FNAF 5, he said there wouldn’t be anymore canon FNAF games saying that the story was complete for the game. So, obviously the Bite that happened at the end of Five Nights at Freddy's 4 was the Bite of '87.

No, as FNAF4 logically and canonically CAN'T be the Bite of 87.And did Scott literally SAY Fnaf4 is the bite? :3

Scott doesn't have to outright say it is the bite of 87. Actually it makes sense for it to be in 1987. Do you really believe that a kids restaraunt would survive after TWO bites from an animatronic? And if it was 83, if they had a bite with a stationary animatronic, why would they even think of making them mobile? Now, think about this. Mangle was mangled in 1987, as she was mangled in fnaf 2 which takes place in 1987 for a few weeks in November. How could we see Mangle in the minigames if it takes place in 1983?

And do you think that Fredbear can be in use during the Bite of 87, though Fredbear isn't even IN FNAF2? I know, what if they got rid of Fredbear right after the bite? BUT, the Bite of 87 hasn't happened yet in FNAF2. It would take place at the very end, or just after. BUT, Fredbear isn't in use.

TWO different restaurants people. Fnaf 2, and the sister location which is the fnaf 4 minigames. That literally explains everything you said.

Hm. But why would Fredbear be in use at one restaurant but not in the other?

Because maybe there is only one Fredbear, and they tried using different animatronics for fnaf 2, so Fredbear wouldn't fit in.

Hm. Maybe the fact that there have been games for the different locations- FNAF 1 was the last, FNAF 2 was the one before FNAF1, and FNAF3 was a horror attraction. But there never was a game for the first restaurant. I have ONE MORE piece of evidence, and you CAN't fight that one

What is it. Because it is logically impossible with my Mangle argument.

Ever heard of game theory? Their theory of FNAF4 not being the Bite of 87…… has been CONFIRMED.

VixenMangleTheFox wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

Nightwing412 wrote:

WilliamWP wrote:

Nextor wrote:

Also, Mangle DID do the Bite of ‘87 because of one obvious fact: Mangle isn’t in the first game. Think about it. If Foxy had caused the Bite of '87, he would have been scrapped and thus NOT IN THE FIRST GAME IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Mangle didn't do the Bite of ‘87. Fredbear caused the Bite. Scott said that when fans were asking for a FNAF 5, he said there wouldn’t be anymore canon FNAF games saying that the story was complete for the game. So, obviously the Bite that happened at the end of Five Nights at Freddy's 4 was the Bite of '87.

No, as FNAF4 logically and canonically CAN'T be the Bite of 87.And did Scott literally SAY Fnaf4 is the bite? :3

Scott doesn't have to outright say it is the bite of 87. Actually it makes sense for it to be in 1987. Do you really believe that a kids restaraunt would survive after TWO bites from an animatronic? And if it was 83, if they had a bite with a stationary animatronic, why would they even think of making them mobile? Now, think about this. Mangle was mangled in 1987, as she was mangled in fnaf 2 which takes place in 1987 for a few weeks in November. How could we see Mangle in the minigames if it takes place in 1983?

And do you think that Fredbear can be in use during the Bite of 87, though Fredbear isn't even IN FNAF2? I know, what if they got rid of Fredbear right after the bite? BUT, the Bite of 87 hasn't happened yet in FNAF2. It would take place at the very end, or just after. BUT, Fredbear isn't in use.

TWO different restaurants people. Fnaf 2, and the sister location which is the fnaf 4 minigames. That literally explains everything you said.

Hm. But why would Fredbear be in use at one restaurant but not in the other?

Because maybe there is only one Fredbear, and they tried using different animatronics for fnaf 2, so Fredbear wouldn't fit in.

Hm. Maybe the fact that there have been games for the different locations- FNAF 1 was the last, FNAF 2 was the one before FNAF1, and FNAF3 was a horror attraction. But there never was a game for the first restaurant. I have ONE MORE piece of evidence, and you CAN't fight that one

What is it. Because it is logically impossible with my Mangle argument.

Ever heard of game theory? Their theory of FNAF4 not being the Bite of 87…… has been CONFIRMED.

I don't listen to Game Theory. Heck, in their timeline videos, they said that Phone guy was the killer! It's like saying “I have an iPhone3!!!”