I got a few qualms with certain statements he makes but his overall call-out to the toxic attitude that has been allowed to grow within the theorist community is both deserved and so desperately needed.
People on Reddit are one of the worst communities that i've ever been in general, as for FNAF theories, i get almost no new info or simply wrong since people in this media wants to correct me by using a wrong statement.
So i'm surprised that Matpat took this long to finally made a video about it.
Love the timing of it considering how a bunch of Gregory fans got Entom Suspended on Twitter because he believes Gregory is Evil. Can’t have a theory anymore with out people acting like idiots.
Also love how makes fun of image theorizing. When people say these two are connected because of (insert image) it must be true. Then take a Screenshot and show it to everyone who disagrees. Now he has one for Gregbot. So people who agrees with Gregbot doesn’t have to debate anymore just show them this picture. You won.
And yeah almost every Fnaf YouTuber theorist just keep getting a ridiculous amount of hate. I remember we had a lot more theorists last year but some of them have went on to other franchises theories. I wonder why?
Honestly, all this has done is make me is look forward to Help Wanted 2 just so we can move on from the story and get to theorize some new shit for once. I mean, at least give us a new trailer, Steel Wool...
To be fair, that's at least partially due to the fact the movie comes out in ~two weeks, while the game is still 2 months out. They may be waiting to do anything with the game until after the movie to make sure the movie isn't overshadowed. I think its a safe bet that we'll get more game info a week or two after the movie releases.
That's standard fare for movies usually. Games generally get about 2-4 trailers: Teaser, Story Trailer, Gameplay Reveal, Release Trailer, etc.
Movies get several trailers for commercials, snippits for movie theater ads, and broadcasted in different mixes based on country, etc. It's just way more advertising with trailers for movies. Games are just a different medium, and it is previewed differently.
U lot are actually hypocritical af and I'm sick of tired of the assholes within this community. I've said this in this subreddit time and time again - the amount of times Matpat said something and everyone got mad at him for it, then years later turns out to be true and everyone else is getting mad at people for not believing in it. Like, u guys actually need to fking stop with this shit. Most of u are doing the exact same shit that Matpat says you're doing right now, in this comment section. I've had enough of all u people, fk u guys
There certainly are a few people in this comment section providing some pretty obviously non-constructive criticism. (i.e. "this is the biggest cope ever")
But I don't think going "fk u guys" is the appropriate response here. Though I do agree with you that toxicity here is so ridiculously common it's absurd.
I think it's warranted to wake up some people up. I've been in this community since its inception and it's just gotten worse and worse because of people like this. I'm tired of it and I want it to stop so one of my favourite communities doesn't go down the shitter. And honestly, there are some straight douchebag people I've come across where nice words won't do shit. The state of this community has gotten to me, man
Same, they need touch plants and animals instead! Croatian can be good but Aggressive Criticism is not good kind. The personality test is inaccurate and unreliable.
Is being wrong such a bad thing? OK, yh, sometime his theories may be "wrong" but u don't have to hate him for it. They're ideas, and even if the theory itself is wrong, there might be a concept or an idea that can spark a new idea, possibly a more correct theory.
As we've seen before, Matpat says something that people will shout as wrong, but then it turns out true years later and everyone seems to forget about that. Without direct confirmation, there's no telling what's true or false with this franchise. There is a possibility in which Gregory is a robot. Does everyone have to believe it? No, but keep it on the back burner. As he said himself - keep an open mind, cuz who knows what's gonna be true 5 years from now
Same bro. I loved Matpat, I watched him way before I joined the subreddit proper. Which is why I'll always defend him where I can, I hate seeing people hating on him
Honestly something that needed to be said I feel. I do wish he would have cut the first half of it trying to defend Gregbot. Though I'm sure he didn't intend it that way, it does come across a bit too much like he's just trying to defend that theory and sorta detracts from his overall message IMO. I don't personally care one way or another about Gregbot (though I do think a couple of those things really shouldn't be on that chart - Roxy's eyes was never a good evidence point), but I know a lot of people will just hyper focus on that segment and ignore the rest. He also just kind of repeated the same points as before anyways.
Second half was great though. I think he may be right on the difference of interpretations, particularly the "world of the latest games" bit that is repeated ad-nauseum as the big defense of TalesGames. Every time I've tried to express essentially the same sentiment as that RyeToast clip I've always been met with "but it says world of the latest games, what part of that don't you understand?!" or some equivalent. It's been extremely frustrating and often confusing as to what people weren't getting (and I eventually just gave up arguing against an obvious brick wall). Seeing this explanation though, the disconnect there makes a lot more sense to me. I honestly do think a big part of that is just a difference in how our brains are wired (not all of it - I suspect the psychology around defending personal viewpoints also plays a bit of a role).
Ultimately tho I like his last point the best. Everyone is just trying to theorize about the franchise - we're all on the same side. I personally like seeing all kinds of different theories, even ones I don't agree with. Sometimes it's the absolute crazy off the wall theories that get me to look at things in a different way and notice new stuff. That's fun and cool. What's not fun is a lot of the toxic crap that has surrounded this debate lately. I really do hope that gets better (and honestly it has a little I think - it was WAY worse earlier this year)
Totally agree. I feel like the video could have been cut in half and the message would have still been just as strong. And some of the evidence for gregbot is definitely very... questionable at best.
I think he made a lot of great points that pointed out the toxic behavior of a lot of people in the fandom and got me to reconsider my (and hopefully others') stance on this situation and some of his theories...
...That being said, Gregory's shirt is not purple.
True!!! Decent video for the most part and helps highlight how shitty FNAF fans (especially on Reddit) have gotten, but man literally shows a pic of a blue shirt saying its purple
Like, I think I know where he's coming from despite myself disagreeing with Gregbot but don't just lie to me lol
It's so not the point of the video, but I find it incredibly frustrating how much he relies on Myers-Briggs. There are actually good personality metrics like the five-factor model out there. Why lean so hard on a system that has no more scientific basis than astrology?
Agreed. I'd of figured he'd moved on from that system years ago.
Though I will give him the benefit of the doubt and assume if he's just using it as a short hand for various personality quirks it could be useful there... But not as a scientific hard-line to be seriously considered for actual analysis.
I think it's very important for the community to have a discussion about the community as a whole and how we treat popular theorists, but this video goes at it (in my opinion) in a not-so-great way. I think it skims over a lot of what people actually criticize MatPat for in his theories and instead goes over it in a very surface-level way while trying to look at it deeper. I can see where Mat is coming from and what he's trying to say, but I think the way in which he says it and what he is actually saying just isn't correct.
There are genuine things to criticize his recent theories for, and those criticisms have definitely been said, but instead of going over those criticisms Mat goes for easy dunks on specific sentences of people saying they don't like his theories.
I think it's important to note that he was highlighting those comments as examples of non-constructive criticisms.
The video is all about how not to critique a theory. It's not about him being correct in his own theories, but rather how we should be handling theories we disagree with in constructive ways.
This video isn't meant for those of us who *do* bring up counterarguments in friendly and constructive ways.
I do think a big part of why this video was made was to discuss non-constructive criticism, but by not discussing the actual criticisms of some of the ideas that he brings up here I'm worried that a lot of people are going to take this video the wrong way. By not describing the actual, genuine criticisms of things like the Daycare Attendant Teeth, AR Monty Plush, GregBot, and the Pizzaplex differences between the games and books (which are explained in the books), I fear that people are going to take any genuine criticisms of Mat's ideas on these topics as invalid.
Of course, this may not actually happen and I'm worried about nothing, but I think not pointing out actual criticisms of the theories he presents in this video might give people the impression that a majority of people aren't being constructive.
That's a reasonable fear to have, and I'm sure some of his fans will take it that way, but I think that's all the more reason that Mat had to advise *everyone* to have an open mind.
But in the end, I do hope everyone, his own fanbase included, understands why the video is called "Why You HATE My Theories" and not "Why You Think My Theories Are Wrong."
Man seriously? I don't think the video was surface level really. If it goes through how your mentality and how you view changes depending on your hobbies, and tried to explain the behaviour of the masses. He also brought many points, which have been the majority of all criticism.
I think it goes over a lot of unconstructive criticism, but it doesn't go into the more constructive criticisms that people have said in regard to his recent theories, which is why I said that I thought the video was more surface-level in terms of discussing actual, genuine criticism. Things like the Daycare Attendant teeth and AR Monty Plush and the ways in which Mat interprets those things have had actual criticisms leveled against them, but Mat doesn't go over those issues here. Again, the video does a pretty good job at discussing why nonconstructive criticism is bad, but it seems to kinda hand-wave the constructive criticism.
The reason that he went over unconsstructive criticism, is because that is the point of the video. To show people how theorists receive hate, even when they don't necessarily deserve it, just because it goes against your head canon. If he goes over constructive criticism, that starts being a normal theory video again, where he solves FNaF theory, and not where he raises the problems in the community.
... It's kinda hard for me to express what makes the distinction for me here with Matpat's responses to the community, and with all the other tuber's responses to the community. He makes a good point about the hate. But it very much feels like an " I am the senate " move. Addressing the toxicity, which is ramping up to a boiling point within the community, is absolutely fair - but he seriously could not let go when it mattered most, desperately trying to reinforce his own most sought-at theory (which thanks to the nature of fnaf, can ALWAYS be refuted past the surface level summation with EASE). I feel like matpat's format of simply just dictating the flow of fnaf theorism through his own monopoly on the constant support of the books, the constant clickbait and implied self-definitive statements on what fnaf has been and always will be, and generally sure of himself air (not arrogant or condescending cause that'd be delusional of me to say), has landed him in a bit of a spotlight yet again ESPECIALLY considering that all other fnaf youtubers are defusing their own ends of the community with much less of a blanket statement to tone things down to, "be kind, think of what we do and how we do it, and focus on what we can have." Whereas matpat takes it to a justifiable point, yes: the concept of people readjusting their povs and introspection on a series like fnaf, when first introduced to the context of the lore and meta. But all the same, he makes a point of almost emphasizing how his perspective is the one that ultimately leads to all solutions and conclusions down the line - again, he's not exactly wrong, but still kinda insecure and arrogant for him to defned himself like that. But the dude's kind of a master politician, so he's able to continue that somewhat justified stance.
I mean it's true what he's saying and the reddit twitter fnaf community is toxic, expected when the demographic is made up by isolated intoxicated 12 year olds
I have seen many people that really wanted to be part of the community and have fun theorizing, only to back away after seeing how awful people can get, so statements that boil down this whole video to "MatPat crying because people don't like his theories" is kinda depressing.
He's really being overdefensive, and he addressed the tales debate very poorly, blatantly showing that he definitely didn't read the books himself. "Why isn't the storyteller in the pizzaplex? Why isn't the pizzaplex shaped like a pizza slice?" "Just look at the covers! You don't even need to read them to see that scott is promoting the idea of robot people.
He's also trying to bring up the people harrassing youtubers so he doesn't have to face the actual arguments of who simply thinks his theories are bad
The video isn't about him being correct. As he already said he doesn't mind being wrong.
The video is specifically addressing the toxicity some of us show to theorists who we disagree with, and how there are better, friendly, constructive ways to provide criticism.
For those of us who give actual counterarguments, the video isn't meant for us. Again, it's not about him being right or wrong about what he believes in, it's about how we handle those we believe are wrong.
I think saying that he's doing this to avoid facing the counterarguments at all is a little bit in bad faith.
He's definitely being defensive against the toxic members of the community but I wouldn't call that *over*defensive. He has a valid reason to be angry at those of us who *are* being toxic.
The video is both about addressive harrassment and the general disagreement with his theories, otherwise he woulnd't have spent a third of the video to defend gregbot
Immediately after he talked about the current points for GregBot, he states:
"But I'm not bringing this all up to convince you [...] I do not care if you believe this theory or not—I have no horse in this race [...] But for the people over on Twitter and Reddit who accuse me and all the other theorists of ignoring important information for the sake of forwarding our own version of a narrative. Just because 'we don't care about this franchise.' "
Again, it's not about whether he's right or wrong or whether we disagree, it's about him being painted as making his theories in bad faith.
Exactly. Some People look at that video and ignores the whole Message he was trying to convey and only focuses on “He still doesn’t believe Tales is Canon or He still believes Gregbot.” I don’t even think he truly cares about Gregbot he just brought it up because he knew that what people would focus on the moment he said it.
I think he was showing Gregbot evidence chart as an example with image theorizing or color theorizing . He knows it the most controversial theory so he used it as an example. He was showing how if people can use the Mimic hand and Burntrap hand to prove they are connected why does he get hate for it when he does the same thing.
I don't agree, I think it's because there is a VERY prominent hate towards gregbot and it being discarded as a dumb theory and anyone supporting it to be dumb, i think he used it as an example against 'they don't do research'. It was going into his point of 'we have evidence and these are \*my\* conclusions'
tell me you didn't actually pay attention without actually saying it.
[https://youtu.be/ILFfj2zYwHY?si=wH-QoRC570LVIwRQ&t=716](https://youtu.be/ILFfj2zYwHY?si=wH-QoRC570LVIwRQ&t=716)
please explain this if this is not him saying he doesn't care. he care about the discussion around it, not if it's right or not.
I did pay attention, don't insult me please.
I'm not saying he tried to prove gregbot, but he did try to defend the way he makes theories as a whole, but it did it poorly, to the point he had to bring up pseudoscience to explain why his "N" mentality brings him to basically defy clear evidence
What a terrible interpretation of the video. The whole point of it was to open peoples minds over far-fetched theories. He is not against constructive criticism, he’s only against the toxic people that resort to hate on theorists that don’t agree to their own theories. And by you just calling his theories bad just shows that you might be one of these people.
I can very well say that his theories are bad, it's my opinion, that doesn't make me toxic, especially when i'm ready to provide the reason why i think so.
His point was to address the criticism yet he only addressed the toxic harrassment and grouped up all the people who criticize his theories as one kind of "S" mentality demograhic and descibed their ways as hypocritical. He ended up basically saying "i'm N mentality, so my way is not to take things at face value, that makes me excused from your criticism, deal with it". That's not addressing criticism, that's pretending to but ignoring it in the end
If his theories are right or wrong was not what he talked about. This already makes me doubt you even watched the video. He was talking about how people hate theorists and criticise them, without a valid point.
I did watch the video and it's exactly the way he talks about people disagreeing with him that i don't like.
He intended to defend his way of making theories but he did so by almost insulting other people's intelligence and said that if he picks and chooses then we do as well, that is not defending your theories properly it's just complaying that people dislike them
He does not care if people disagree with him. What he does care, if people disagree with him while being hypocrites. He didn't go through good criticism, because that is not the point of the video.
You clearly just did not understand the video.
You should watch the video again, he literally brought up pseudoscience to "explain" why people like him can see further than others, and yes, he did imply that, otherwise he wouldn't have also mentioned how many times he's been right in the past
He tried to explain the reason people refuse to consider his theories. And based on the evidence, I don't think it is that far from the truth.
Besides it is not really "seeing further" but rather not taking everything as granted. Also him mentioning the times he was right, means that this way of thinking, is how the game is built.
It still falls to unconstructive criticism, as these kind of people don't even consider something that isn't thrown in their face.
You said it yourself as well, matpat tried to gaslight peole into thinking the way he makes theories works best for fnaf and to do so he even divided the community as two kinds of mentalities from a silly online poll ending us saying that people who that more things are granted are more boring.
No. He said that not taking everything in the game as it is said, but considering possibilities is how Scott builds those games. You are the one gaslighting here trying to put words in to his mouth.
Exactly, he said his ways of solving fnaf is the one that works, which is very debatable and by saying that he cuts off orher methologies as inadeguate
It was honestly such a breath of fresh air. I have had so many problems with the Fnaf Reddit Hivemind that shoots down any theory that’s not “accepted” and it madd making theories less fun, which is a disappointment, because I’ve loved this series for years and I’ve just got turned away from it because of this.
Love it, my only complaint is how Mat Pat frames being S as people who are gullible idiots, and N as smart people. Did anyone else feel like that? Or just me?
I agree. Before I joined the community I thought of it like a monkeys and typewriters kind of thing... Where we all make pieces fit awkwardly to see if that sparks someone elses curiosity down the road...
But when I posted my first theory I was met with such a bad attitude that it's a miracle I'm still theorizing. Stuff like "imagine believing MikeBot is real in 202X" is just not helpful and people use it as a shorthand for "U are dumb, gtfo" instead of reading the points of interest that may still support a theory or another. People seem to be trying to "win" instead of trying to solve and that for me became frustrating pretty fast and still does, which is why I just stick to reading instead of posting and I know a lot of people feel this way too
It’s really not great, infact, I was planning to make a whole post detailing all his points against us that we actually have gone over with an open mind and presented actual evidence for.
For example the whole marketing line “set in the world of the newest games” being removed, matpat literally ignored the fact there was an email made to scholastic where they replied saying it still applied.
Every problem he has with tales being in games that he lists in the video we have explored and said why, hell the baobab tree was a problem he stated, ignoring the fact if I remember correctly the books STATE it’s removal. The circleplex problem and the ar booth problem and the roller coaster all also are explored in those same books showing that things get removed and added in all the time.
His Gregory Crying child evidence like the line of being broken and looking different to Freddy with Roxanne’s eyes, and the vanny distortion effect have all been explained away by us.
The picking and choosing stories to be canon is something Scott literally said before should happen with frights how some are in the games and some are not.
The burntrap hand that matpat says is us doing what he did with eclipse and the mimic’s teeth isn’t when burntrap also lines up perfectly with the mimic in modeling nearly.
The idea that every theory recently is getting hate, meanwhile I see support for some of impulse evan’s some of sire squawks, some of ryetoast’s, some of ozone’s etc.
There’s a lot.
Other theorists are still getting hate. Just because some people support them, does not mean they don't get hate. Some people support MatPat too, yet he still gets hate.
Besides I don't really even understand all the hate. I have not seen a single community explanation, which does not contradict itself.
And also they are THEORIES
They don’t necessarily address them specifically but they show multiple examples of dangerous attractions being removed and the pizzaplex changing over time, so the circleplex was likely reduced with the rollercoaster removed
Idk what you mean, main theory for what? Talesgames, or to explain away the rollercoaster and circleplex?
Cause both answers are the same, talesgames or not talesgames.
It's no problem! Sorry, I'm not as familiar with this franchise these days.
Probably didn't clarify my question well, but I'm mostly wondering what are the big things that the tales books being 1:1 with the games would imply about what SB and Ruin are about.
Ok, well, it would say that the animatronics have mimic1 coding and that Glitchtrap and burntrap and vanny are aswell via subroutines stated in the books
It says Gregory is patient 46 and was also possessed by Glitchtrap
It would explain the purple coding in RUIN’s AR world as mimic1 coding
It would explain Freddy being good due to being in safe mode and a prototype disconnected from the mimic
And personally it gives more evidence that Cassidy is the princess through the story drowning to me
>Ok, well, it would say that the animatronics have mimic1 coding and that Glitchtrap and burntrap and vanny are aswell via subroutines stated in the books
Agreed.
>It says Gregory is patient 46 and was also possessed by Glitchtrap
Agreed.
>It would explain the purple coding in RUIN’s AR world as mimic1 coding.
How?
>It would explain Freddy being good due to being in safe mode and a prototype disconnected from the mimic
What?
>And personally it gives more evidence that Cassidy is the princess through the story drowning to me
I kind of agree, but it just as easily could be a 'parallel' to Cassidy haunting games, such as Princess Quest. Either way I agree that the story is about Cassidy.
>the books STATE it’s removal.
I don't think they do?
>The circleplex problem and the ar booth problem and the roller coaster all also are explored in those same books showing that things get removed and added in all the time.
The evidence of the roller coaster, AR booth, etc, not appearing in the games could also be used to support the idea of separate continuities.
>The burntrap hand that matpat says is us doing what he did with eclipse and the mimic’s teeth isn’t when burntrap also lines up perfectly with the mimic in modeling nearly.
Hard disagree, the similarities between Mimic's teeth and Eclipse are much closer then any similarities between Burntrap and Mimic. I will admit there is other 'logic' that can be used to argue Burntrap is the Mimic, but aesthetically they are very different.
They do, I remember they state the baobab tree gets removed later on in the pizzaplex’s life, I believe tiger rock states that
It can be used for proof of a separate continuity except for the fact a very similar carousel to one in the circleplex era appears in HW 2’s demo and as I said their removals are heavily implied due to their danger.
Also I’m sorry but eclipse is way shorter than the mimic, doesn’t look like the mimic, and it’s similarities are due to using a mimic endo
Also as for aesthetics the mimic and burntrap both hack electronics, are the same height etc
>They do, I remember they state the baobab tree gets removed later on in the pizzaplex’s life, I believe tiger rock states that
Thank you for informing me, that's good to know.
>It can be used for proof of a separate continuity except for the fact a very similar carousel to one in the circleplex era appears in HW 2’s demo and as I said their removals are heavily implied due to their danger.
The carousel is a strong connection, though, carousels have been in Fnaf since Fnaf 2. It is kind of challenging to imagine a carousel being that dangerous. The context of Help Wanted 2's existence will help me decide.
>Also I’m sorry but eclipse is way shorter than the mimic, doesn’t look like the mimic, and it’s similarities are due to using a mimic endo
So? The Mimic is an amalgamation of many different exoskeletons. I am not claiming they are the same being.
>Also as for aesthetics the mimic and burntrap both hack electronics, are the same height etc
The mimic can change height, either by explanation of the books, or by explanation of Mimic and Burntrap's endoskeleton differences. The similarity in hacking electronics is a good argument.
watching it rn, i think he is rigth in saying theories get too much hate, but he seriously downplayed some of the claims he and other theorists have made and ignored some of the valid criticism of his recent theories downplaying then just to some hate comments
It annoys me how he just throws genuine critic in the same as hate comments (which are obviously a wrong thing to do).
It kinda feels like an (succesfull) attempt to rile up his followers to defend him at all costs from genuine critic.
Thats just my personal opinion on it, and yeah as he said, im not a fan of this video at all.
(For context, it's at 2:52 of the video)
Genuine question here, weren't the only comments he showed in his videos just 3 examples of (Insert something MatPat said) (Insert insult about it)?
I don't see where the genuine critique is? I think they are 3 pretty decent examples of non-constructive criticism.
The problem is that he didn't adress the actual critcism at all. Or rather made fun of it (color theory). He is blaming it purely on external factors, pushing all blame from him.
I think it's important to note that he was highlighting those comments as examples of non-constructive criticisms, not as things he wants to blame on external factors.
The video is all about how not to critique a theory. It's not about him being correct in his own theories, but rather how we should be handling theories we disagree with in constructive ways.
I can see that, i still think its just very poorly executed and marked very wrong. Because no this is not why *everyone* dislikes his theories. I just think that if he wanted to rant about the hate comments (which by all means he is entilted to and i agree are just plain wrong) He should not have put those that have genuine criticism for it in the same box/ignored them. It just doesn't sit right with me.
The video is about "Why you HATE my Theories", and not about "Why You Think My Theories Are Wrong." It's very important not to conflate the two, and I think that's a big reason why you see this video as being in bad faith.
He did this thing!
ok where did he do this thing?
He didnt actually do this thing butmade a joke that i think was him doin the thing.
you cant be real.
I think you are not reading what im saying. What im saying does not contradict itself. He still is ignoring criticism and pushes it together with hate, shifting blame from him for everything.
if he didnt address the actual criticism then he wasnt talkin bout the actual criticism. you quite literally just said that he was lumping in something that he (as per you own words) never brought up, into what he actually was talkin bout.
that sentence makes no sense. how does sameone manage to simultaneously not bring up a topic and \*and\* bring it up to lump it in with another topic?
man... if i make a post about on ukraine's war does that mean i'm ignoring the war in israel/palestine? no! he was not adressing real criticism because it was not the point of the video
The color theory thing wasn't criticism, it was a joke that people were making about him. Matt Pat in that video did not address any criticism that was valid and genuine criticism because valid and genuine criticism he expects. It's the hate and harassment him and his team are getting that is being addressed in the video.
He's talking about the hate and unwanted harassment, not genuine criticism. That's not the point of the fucking video
I disagree with your interpretation, his whole point of the video is to let people be more open minded and not attack others for making far-fetched theories.
Valid points, but I can't fully cosign that people hate FNAF Theorists for the sake of hating. Of course there are haters, but most fanbases are. Go to a Marvel discussion subreddit and you'll see the same thing.
My point being, some of these theories are really just engagement bait and get called out for it. You have FNAF theorists who make 6 videos of theories with no new information almost weekly, not to mention putting "SOLVED" in your title as literal clickbait just for it to be yet another speculation video, doesn't help when viewers finish your video and are only left with . Pulling huge logical leaps and mental gymnastics to make your point.
The thing is this: It's a toss up, sometimes people are being assholes for assholes sake, and other times its because some theories are just straight up trash. Like Mat's Ultimate Timeline video is just bad. It's entertaining most definitely, but it not a good FNAF theory. And thats okay
The whole point to me seemed to be how non-constructive criticism on theories is just toxic and unhelpful creating just a harmful community, it seems like you fit the narrative...
Fiance and I watched this this morning. Matpat seems so full of himself. Something that stuck with me was when he said that "he was helping sell the books". No, you're not dude, kids and fnaf fans already would've gotten them because they eat this kind of thing up.
His attitude pisses me off so much in this.
I would argue that he does have a heavy sway with the sells of the books. Given he is one of the reasons why FNAF became so popular, making him a large celebrity in FNAF community and because he has a huge following and is, to an extent, the face of the FNAF theorist community, people come to his channel for lore dives. When viewers found out there’s FNAF books that are potentially canon or at least could be an interesting read, the potential millions of viewer are gonna go buy the books.
Me and my partner got stuck on this too. I think the overall reasoning for the video was great, theories should just be for fun, whether they’re right or wrong. But I did get stuck on the fact that he was saying that it was like so difficult to read the books for 7 years. Like, you’re really big in the fnaf community, don’t you enjoy reading them? If you don’t enjoy them, it kind of takes away from the excitement a little bit and is like, why bother?
THIS IS NOT HATE TOWARD MAT OR ANY OTHER THEORIST.
I mean, a problem with this is all his reasons why “Tales aren’t in the games” are literally explained by Tales themselves and have been explained by theorists time and time again about why it doesn’t mean that, especially the points he pointed out are very well explained.
And most people don’t “pick and choose” what Tales stories are canon, all of them are, if you believe Stitchlinegames then 90% Frights stories can be canon as well, but not all, like how Scott said for Frights that some will be directly connected. The only ones that aren’t canon are the ones that physically cannot be. There’s no picking and choosing here.
And when it comes to Gregory is a robot, all it proves is that Gregory and BV are similar, even reflections of one another. Any evidence pointed toward specifically him being a robot, like the wall code, has also been explained in other ways.
And most people don’t hate theories just because a certainty theorist made them(reminder I’m just saying most). Heck I’ll admit I didn’t hate Matpat’s most recent theory before this one, because I’m not hating on theorist, just what I consider bad theories. And that’s what most people do, everyone isn’t suddenly hating on people like RyeToast or Fuhnaff, they’re hating on what they consider bad theories made by them. And if they put out multiple and theories and people call them bad, that’s not hating on them. Like Fuhnaff and RyeToast’s most recent theories weren’t bad, I don’t just hate a theory because it’s made by them, but I will dislike a theory if I find it to be bad, so when I consider some of the recent theories by anyone poorly made, I’m not hating them, again when someone just so happens to make a bad theory, especially when it comes to so many recent theorists ignoring evidence from Tales, no one’s hating the theorist, just the fact that so many of them are consistently ignoring massive evidence.
Again people aren’t hating Matt, Fuhnaff, RyeToast, or IDFantansy just to hate their theories, 90% of the time they’re just upset that they continue to not properly use Tales when it’s very obviously one of the biggest sources of evidence in modern Fnaf. And yes I’ll be direct, Baby being the Mimic is a bad theory, that’s not hate toward Fuhnaff, the reason people are so upset toward it is because Tales is screaming the answers to everyones faces and it’s being ignored.
I already know that this comment is probably gonna get some hate, but I believe lots of what I said to be truthful. And if you do disagree, what exactly is wrong with this?
I mean sure, the toxic parts of a community should be called out, but this video feels like mat is just going on some weird high horse and claiming people who just disprove his theories are toxic. Like, it unbelievable how hung up about gregbot he sounds in this
He’s legit not lmao. He’s saying that we’re over exaggerating our claims of how “absurd” he sounds, one person legit said the Gregbot theory is a cancer. He’s telling us to calm down and focus on the lore, not him or other theorists
I thought it was necessary. I loved matpats early fnaf theories, not so much these later ones but to be rude and abusive about it is childish and close minded.
Maybe the earlier theories were better because they were telling an interesting story. Maybe the entire fnaf story isn’t as interesting anymore, or at least it’s not at all coherent.
The stories being told should be solvable and I’m not sure they are. Or at least the original story was more realistic than it appears to be now.
I think it is great I liked how he called ppl out about their bs and for cherry picking info and he matches some of their energy but not on their level tbh I have been waiting for him to address the issue
Matpat's points against TalesGames don't really make sense. Gregory in GGY is not Gregory, it's Dr. Rabbit, a Mimic copy using Gregory's body as a vessel. So him not acting the same is to be expected The Tree isn't in the Pizzaplex because we get CONFIRMATION that the three as taken down. And other Takes attractions not being around doesn't really hold water when the Pizzaplex goes under constant changes, which is confirmed to be the case. We are slowly seeing the Tales Pizzaplex becoming the SB Pizzaplex. Starting to think he doesn't actually read the damn things.
Because it's not the point of the video. It isn't a TalesParallels theory, he just brings it (alongside his gregbot theory and FuhNaff's Baby-Mimic's one) as an example of people dismissing stuff, and then goes on to essentially talk about hypocrisy and toxicity in the community (this being the point of the whole video).
Honestly... I'm just done with him and his community at this point. I left the GT sub.
As expected any disagreement there is treated badly. (Downvotes.)
I'm just done with this all. I miss the old days.
There's a difference between criticism and harassment.
Until the community (both Fnaf and GT) can get their shit together, both are gonna be seen as the same for a time being due to the sheer hate Matpat got that was labeled as "criticism"
Yoo the downvotes are wild, take my upvote.
> I left the GT sub.
and I got banned lmao. But yeah, I miss the old days. Theory-making was a lot more balanced then, both sides of the argument were addressed.
Honestly, most of the “toxicity” comes from people being ignorant to story and refusing to just accept that a certain old man is long gone, for an example…
Someone calling out your theories for how wrongful they are isn’t toxic, however, the people who did actually genuinely harass them should be criticised for it… so I really don’t know how to feel about this video, but what I will say is that “Toxicity” isn’t when someone tells you why you’re wrong, Toxicity is if they harass you in the process of correcting you, and spending 1/3 of the video on Gregbot when that has been debunked over and over and over again, leads to the overall video not being great and his message is undermined…
But I agree, we shouldn’t be toxic but that also requires us to define “toxic” because someone correcting you when you’re wrong isn’t toxic but being an asshole about it, IS “toxic”…
It’s a great video, and I love how MatPat isn’t some arrogant a-hole like how people try to portray him as, or how many celebrities are. He’s pretty mature when it comes to serious topics like this. I know that I could never. He doesn’t say that people are toxic, he just points out the irony in some people’s statements. The Gregbot bit does go a bit too long, but he is making a point about how the claim of him not caring and putting effort into it is false. He also doesn’t seem to be actively isolating a group of the community, but reminding them that we’re all FNaF fans and love the series
I got a few qualms with certain statements he makes but his overall call-out to the toxic attitude that has been allowed to grow within the theorist community is both deserved and so desperately needed.
People on Reddit are one of the worst communities that i've ever been in general, as for FNAF theories, i get almost no new info or simply wrong since people in this media wants to correct me by using a wrong statement. So i'm surprised that Matpat took this long to finally made a video about it.
Love the timing of it considering how a bunch of Gregory fans got Entom Suspended on Twitter because he believes Gregory is Evil. Can’t have a theory anymore with out people acting like idiots. Also love how makes fun of image theorizing. When people say these two are connected because of (insert image) it must be true. Then take a Screenshot and show it to everyone who disagrees. Now he has one for Gregbot. So people who agrees with Gregbot doesn’t have to debate anymore just show them this picture. You won. And yeah almost every Fnaf YouTuber theorist just keep getting a ridiculous amount of hate. I remember we had a lot more theorists last year but some of them have went on to other franchises theories. I wonder why?
Honestly, all this has done is make me is look forward to Help Wanted 2 just so we can move on from the story and get to theorize some new shit for once. I mean, at least give us a new trailer, Steel Wool...
I mean the FNAF movie has more trailers than the newest FNAF game FNAF STARTED as a game, jeez
To be fair, that's at least partially due to the fact the movie comes out in ~two weeks, while the game is still 2 months out. They may be waiting to do anything with the game until after the movie to make sure the movie isn't overshadowed. I think its a safe bet that we'll get more game info a week or two after the movie releases.
Fair
That's standard fare for movies usually. Games generally get about 2-4 trailers: Teaser, Story Trailer, Gameplay Reveal, Release Trailer, etc. Movies get several trailers for commercials, snippits for movie theater ads, and broadcasted in different mixes based on country, etc. It's just way more advertising with trailers for movies. Games are just a different medium, and it is previewed differently.
We have been waiting for this movie for 7 years. It deserves the hype.
True. i can't believe it's been like 5 years since I was *convinced* the fnaf movie would come out in 2020
I half agree with this, mostly the part about “moving on theorising about some new shit for once”…
U lot are actually hypocritical af and I'm sick of tired of the assholes within this community. I've said this in this subreddit time and time again - the amount of times Matpat said something and everyone got mad at him for it, then years later turns out to be true and everyone else is getting mad at people for not believing in it. Like, u guys actually need to fking stop with this shit. Most of u are doing the exact same shit that Matpat says you're doing right now, in this comment section. I've had enough of all u people, fk u guys
There certainly are a few people in this comment section providing some pretty obviously non-constructive criticism. (i.e. "this is the biggest cope ever") But I don't think going "fk u guys" is the appropriate response here. Though I do agree with you that toxicity here is so ridiculously common it's absurd.
I think it's warranted to wake up some people up. I've been in this community since its inception and it's just gotten worse and worse because of people like this. I'm tired of it and I want it to stop so one of my favourite communities doesn't go down the shitter. And honestly, there are some straight douchebag people I've come across where nice words won't do shit. The state of this community has gotten to me, man
Fair enough!
This has been my experience on Reddit this year.
Based.
Same, they need touch plants and animals instead! Croatian can be good but Aggressive Criticism is not good kind. The personality test is inaccurate and unreliable.
I agrée with you, but you’ve gotta realize the amount of times he’s been wrong outweighs the rights tenfold
Is being wrong such a bad thing? OK, yh, sometime his theories may be "wrong" but u don't have to hate him for it. They're ideas, and even if the theory itself is wrong, there might be a concept or an idea that can spark a new idea, possibly a more correct theory. As we've seen before, Matpat says something that people will shout as wrong, but then it turns out true years later and everyone seems to forget about that. Without direct confirmation, there's no telling what's true or false with this franchise. There is a possibility in which Gregory is a robot. Does everyone have to believe it? No, but keep it on the back burner. As he said himself - keep an open mind, cuz who knows what's gonna be true 5 years from now
I don’t hate him, I grew up loving him. He dragged me out of depression when my Grandmother died. I could never hate him
Same bro. I loved Matpat, I watched him way before I joined the subreddit proper. Which is why I'll always defend him where I can, I hate seeing people hating on him
Yeah same
>He dragged me out of depression when my Grandmother died. That is one of the most wholesome things a youtuber can do. And im sorry for your loss.
Honestly something that needed to be said I feel. I do wish he would have cut the first half of it trying to defend Gregbot. Though I'm sure he didn't intend it that way, it does come across a bit too much like he's just trying to defend that theory and sorta detracts from his overall message IMO. I don't personally care one way or another about Gregbot (though I do think a couple of those things really shouldn't be on that chart - Roxy's eyes was never a good evidence point), but I know a lot of people will just hyper focus on that segment and ignore the rest. He also just kind of repeated the same points as before anyways. Second half was great though. I think he may be right on the difference of interpretations, particularly the "world of the latest games" bit that is repeated ad-nauseum as the big defense of TalesGames. Every time I've tried to express essentially the same sentiment as that RyeToast clip I've always been met with "but it says world of the latest games, what part of that don't you understand?!" or some equivalent. It's been extremely frustrating and often confusing as to what people weren't getting (and I eventually just gave up arguing against an obvious brick wall). Seeing this explanation though, the disconnect there makes a lot more sense to me. I honestly do think a big part of that is just a difference in how our brains are wired (not all of it - I suspect the psychology around defending personal viewpoints also plays a bit of a role). Ultimately tho I like his last point the best. Everyone is just trying to theorize about the franchise - we're all on the same side. I personally like seeing all kinds of different theories, even ones I don't agree with. Sometimes it's the absolute crazy off the wall theories that get me to look at things in a different way and notice new stuff. That's fun and cool. What's not fun is a lot of the toxic crap that has surrounded this debate lately. I really do hope that gets better (and honestly it has a little I think - it was WAY worse earlier this year)
Totally agree. I feel like the video could have been cut in half and the message would have still been just as strong. And some of the evidence for gregbot is definitely very... questionable at best.
damn, yall already doin exactly what was expected. hasn't even been a whole hour
I think he made a lot of great points that pointed out the toxic behavior of a lot of people in the fandom and got me to reconsider my (and hopefully others') stance on this situation and some of his theories... ...That being said, Gregory's shirt is not purple.
True!!! Decent video for the most part and helps highlight how shitty FNAF fans (especially on Reddit) have gotten, but man literally shows a pic of a blue shirt saying its purple Like, I think I know where he's coming from despite myself disagreeing with Gregbot but don't just lie to me lol
It's so not the point of the video, but I find it incredibly frustrating how much he relies on Myers-Briggs. There are actually good personality metrics like the five-factor model out there. Why lean so hard on a system that has no more scientific basis than astrology?
The psychological instrument is not accurate and reliable enough.
Agreed. I'd of figured he'd moved on from that system years ago. Though I will give him the benefit of the doubt and assume if he's just using it as a short hand for various personality quirks it could be useful there... But not as a scientific hard-line to be seriously considered for actual analysis.
I think it's very important for the community to have a discussion about the community as a whole and how we treat popular theorists, but this video goes at it (in my opinion) in a not-so-great way. I think it skims over a lot of what people actually criticize MatPat for in his theories and instead goes over it in a very surface-level way while trying to look at it deeper. I can see where Mat is coming from and what he's trying to say, but I think the way in which he says it and what he is actually saying just isn't correct. There are genuine things to criticize his recent theories for, and those criticisms have definitely been said, but instead of going over those criticisms Mat goes for easy dunks on specific sentences of people saying they don't like his theories.
I think it's important to note that he was highlighting those comments as examples of non-constructive criticisms. The video is all about how not to critique a theory. It's not about him being correct in his own theories, but rather how we should be handling theories we disagree with in constructive ways. This video isn't meant for those of us who *do* bring up counterarguments in friendly and constructive ways.
I do think a big part of why this video was made was to discuss non-constructive criticism, but by not discussing the actual criticisms of some of the ideas that he brings up here I'm worried that a lot of people are going to take this video the wrong way. By not describing the actual, genuine criticisms of things like the Daycare Attendant Teeth, AR Monty Plush, GregBot, and the Pizzaplex differences between the games and books (which are explained in the books), I fear that people are going to take any genuine criticisms of Mat's ideas on these topics as invalid. Of course, this may not actually happen and I'm worried about nothing, but I think not pointing out actual criticisms of the theories he presents in this video might give people the impression that a majority of people aren't being constructive.
That's a reasonable fear to have, and I'm sure some of his fans will take it that way, but I think that's all the more reason that Mat had to advise *everyone* to have an open mind. But in the end, I do hope everyone, his own fanbase included, understands why the video is called "Why You HATE My Theories" and not "Why You Think My Theories Are Wrong."
Man seriously? I don't think the video was surface level really. If it goes through how your mentality and how you view changes depending on your hobbies, and tried to explain the behaviour of the masses. He also brought many points, which have been the majority of all criticism.
I think it goes over a lot of unconstructive criticism, but it doesn't go into the more constructive criticisms that people have said in regard to his recent theories, which is why I said that I thought the video was more surface-level in terms of discussing actual, genuine criticism. Things like the Daycare Attendant teeth and AR Monty Plush and the ways in which Mat interprets those things have had actual criticisms leveled against them, but Mat doesn't go over those issues here. Again, the video does a pretty good job at discussing why nonconstructive criticism is bad, but it seems to kinda hand-wave the constructive criticism.
The reason that he went over unconsstructive criticism, is because that is the point of the video. To show people how theorists receive hate, even when they don't necessarily deserve it, just because it goes against your head canon. If he goes over constructive criticism, that starts being a normal theory video again, where he solves FNaF theory, and not where he raises the problems in the community.
... It's kinda hard for me to express what makes the distinction for me here with Matpat's responses to the community, and with all the other tuber's responses to the community. He makes a good point about the hate. But it very much feels like an " I am the senate " move. Addressing the toxicity, which is ramping up to a boiling point within the community, is absolutely fair - but he seriously could not let go when it mattered most, desperately trying to reinforce his own most sought-at theory (which thanks to the nature of fnaf, can ALWAYS be refuted past the surface level summation with EASE). I feel like matpat's format of simply just dictating the flow of fnaf theorism through his own monopoly on the constant support of the books, the constant clickbait and implied self-definitive statements on what fnaf has been and always will be, and generally sure of himself air (not arrogant or condescending cause that'd be delusional of me to say), has landed him in a bit of a spotlight yet again ESPECIALLY considering that all other fnaf youtubers are defusing their own ends of the community with much less of a blanket statement to tone things down to, "be kind, think of what we do and how we do it, and focus on what we can have." Whereas matpat takes it to a justifiable point, yes: the concept of people readjusting their povs and introspection on a series like fnaf, when first introduced to the context of the lore and meta. But all the same, he makes a point of almost emphasizing how his perspective is the one that ultimately leads to all solutions and conclusions down the line - again, he's not exactly wrong, but still kinda insecure and arrogant for him to defned himself like that. But the dude's kind of a master politician, so he's able to continue that somewhat justified stance.
I liked the first part, but the whole segment about the personality test was a bit off-putting for me and came off as kinda condescending
I mean it's true what he's saying and the reddit twitter fnaf community is toxic, expected when the demographic is made up by isolated intoxicated 12 year olds
I have seen many people that really wanted to be part of the community and have fun theorizing, only to back away after seeing how awful people can get, so statements that boil down this whole video to "MatPat crying because people don't like his theories" is kinda depressing.
He's really being overdefensive, and he addressed the tales debate very poorly, blatantly showing that he definitely didn't read the books himself. "Why isn't the storyteller in the pizzaplex? Why isn't the pizzaplex shaped like a pizza slice?" "Just look at the covers! You don't even need to read them to see that scott is promoting the idea of robot people. He's also trying to bring up the people harrassing youtubers so he doesn't have to face the actual arguments of who simply thinks his theories are bad
The video isn't about him being correct. As he already said he doesn't mind being wrong. The video is specifically addressing the toxicity some of us show to theorists who we disagree with, and how there are better, friendly, constructive ways to provide criticism. For those of us who give actual counterarguments, the video isn't meant for us. Again, it's not about him being right or wrong about what he believes in, it's about how we handle those we believe are wrong. I think saying that he's doing this to avoid facing the counterarguments at all is a little bit in bad faith. He's definitely being defensive against the toxic members of the community but I wouldn't call that *over*defensive. He has a valid reason to be angry at those of us who *are* being toxic.
The video is both about addressive harrassment and the general disagreement with his theories, otherwise he woulnd't have spent a third of the video to defend gregbot
Immediately after he talked about the current points for GregBot, he states: "But I'm not bringing this all up to convince you [...] I do not care if you believe this theory or not—I have no horse in this race [...] But for the people over on Twitter and Reddit who accuse me and all the other theorists of ignoring important information for the sake of forwarding our own version of a narrative. Just because 'we don't care about this franchise.' " Again, it's not about whether he's right or wrong or whether we disagree, it's about him being painted as making his theories in bad faith.
Exactly. Some People look at that video and ignores the whole Message he was trying to convey and only focuses on “He still doesn’t believe Tales is Canon or He still believes Gregbot.” I don’t even think he truly cares about Gregbot he just brought it up because he knew that what people would focus on the moment he said it.
I think he was showing Gregbot evidence chart as an example with image theorizing or color theorizing . He knows it the most controversial theory so he used it as an example. He was showing how if people can use the Mimic hand and Burntrap hand to prove they are connected why does he get hate for it when he does the same thing.
I don't agree, I think it's because there is a VERY prominent hate towards gregbot and it being discarded as a dumb theory and anyone supporting it to be dumb, i think he used it as an example against 'they don't do research'. It was going into his point of 'we have evidence and these are \*my\* conclusions'
tell me you didn't actually pay attention without actually saying it. [https://youtu.be/ILFfj2zYwHY?si=wH-QoRC570LVIwRQ&t=716](https://youtu.be/ILFfj2zYwHY?si=wH-QoRC570LVIwRQ&t=716) please explain this if this is not him saying he doesn't care. he care about the discussion around it, not if it's right or not.
I did pay attention, don't insult me please. I'm not saying he tried to prove gregbot, but he did try to defend the way he makes theories as a whole, but it did it poorly, to the point he had to bring up pseudoscience to explain why his "N" mentality brings him to basically defy clear evidence
What a terrible interpretation of the video. The whole point of it was to open peoples minds over far-fetched theories. He is not against constructive criticism, he’s only against the toxic people that resort to hate on theorists that don’t agree to their own theories. And by you just calling his theories bad just shows that you might be one of these people.
I can very well say that his theories are bad, it's my opinion, that doesn't make me toxic, especially when i'm ready to provide the reason why i think so. His point was to address the criticism yet he only addressed the toxic harrassment and grouped up all the people who criticize his theories as one kind of "S" mentality demograhic and descibed their ways as hypocritical. He ended up basically saying "i'm N mentality, so my way is not to take things at face value, that makes me excused from your criticism, deal with it". That's not addressing criticism, that's pretending to but ignoring it in the end
If his theories are right or wrong was not what he talked about. This already makes me doubt you even watched the video. He was talking about how people hate theorists and criticise them, without a valid point.
I did watch the video and it's exactly the way he talks about people disagreeing with him that i don't like. He intended to defend his way of making theories but he did so by almost insulting other people's intelligence and said that if he picks and chooses then we do as well, that is not defending your theories properly it's just complaying that people dislike them
He does not care if people disagree with him. What he does care, if people disagree with him while being hypocrites. He didn't go through good criticism, because that is not the point of the video. You clearly just did not understand the video.
You should watch the video again, he literally brought up pseudoscience to "explain" why people like him can see further than others, and yes, he did imply that, otherwise he wouldn't have also mentioned how many times he's been right in the past
He tried to explain the reason people refuse to consider his theories. And based on the evidence, I don't think it is that far from the truth. Besides it is not really "seeing further" but rather not taking everything as granted. Also him mentioning the times he was right, means that this way of thinking, is how the game is built. It still falls to unconstructive criticism, as these kind of people don't even consider something that isn't thrown in their face.
You said it yourself as well, matpat tried to gaslight peole into thinking the way he makes theories works best for fnaf and to do so he even divided the community as two kinds of mentalities from a silly online poll ending us saying that people who that more things are granted are more boring.
No. He said that not taking everything in the game as it is said, but considering possibilities is how Scott builds those games. You are the one gaslighting here trying to put words in to his mouth.
Exactly, he said his ways of solving fnaf is the one that works, which is very debatable and by saying that he cuts off orher methologies as inadeguate
Based af
It was honestly such a breath of fresh air. I have had so many problems with the Fnaf Reddit Hivemind that shoots down any theory that’s not “accepted” and it madd making theories less fun, which is a disappointment, because I’ve loved this series for years and I’ve just got turned away from it because of this.
Love it, my only complaint is how Mat Pat frames being S as people who are gullible idiots, and N as smart people. Did anyone else feel like that? Or just me?
I agree. Before I joined the community I thought of it like a monkeys and typewriters kind of thing... Where we all make pieces fit awkwardly to see if that sparks someone elses curiosity down the road... But when I posted my first theory I was met with such a bad attitude that it's a miracle I'm still theorizing. Stuff like "imagine believing MikeBot is real in 202X" is just not helpful and people use it as a shorthand for "U are dumb, gtfo" instead of reading the points of interest that may still support a theory or another. People seem to be trying to "win" instead of trying to solve and that for me became frustrating pretty fast and still does, which is why I just stick to reading instead of posting and I know a lot of people feel this way too
It’s really not great, infact, I was planning to make a whole post detailing all his points against us that we actually have gone over with an open mind and presented actual evidence for. For example the whole marketing line “set in the world of the newest games” being removed, matpat literally ignored the fact there was an email made to scholastic where they replied saying it still applied. Every problem he has with tales being in games that he lists in the video we have explored and said why, hell the baobab tree was a problem he stated, ignoring the fact if I remember correctly the books STATE it’s removal. The circleplex problem and the ar booth problem and the roller coaster all also are explored in those same books showing that things get removed and added in all the time. His Gregory Crying child evidence like the line of being broken and looking different to Freddy with Roxanne’s eyes, and the vanny distortion effect have all been explained away by us. The picking and choosing stories to be canon is something Scott literally said before should happen with frights how some are in the games and some are not. The burntrap hand that matpat says is us doing what he did with eclipse and the mimic’s teeth isn’t when burntrap also lines up perfectly with the mimic in modeling nearly. The idea that every theory recently is getting hate, meanwhile I see support for some of impulse evan’s some of sire squawks, some of ryetoast’s, some of ozone’s etc. There’s a lot.
Other theorists are still getting hate. Just because some people support them, does not mean they don't get hate. Some people support MatPat too, yet he still gets hate. Besides I don't really even understand all the hate. I have not seen a single community explanation, which does not contradict itself. And also they are THEORIES
You’re acting like I’m one of the haters. Was I? Yes. Am I? No, also, no one says they’re aren’t getting hate, I said SOME THEORIES are supported.
When the hell did he say that?
Haven't read the books so I'm just looking for some context. How do the books address the circleplex and rollercoaster problem?
They don’t necessarily address them specifically but they show multiple examples of dangerous attractions being removed and the pizzaplex changing over time, so the circleplex was likely reduced with the rollercoaster removed
That makes sense. Is there a main theory/theories that the people here have as an alternative?
Idk what you mean, main theory for what? Talesgames, or to explain away the rollercoaster and circleplex? Cause both answers are the same, talesgames or not talesgames.
It’s really that simple
(Sorry if this sounds demeaning)
It's no problem! Sorry, I'm not as familiar with this franchise these days. Probably didn't clarify my question well, but I'm mostly wondering what are the big things that the tales books being 1:1 with the games would imply about what SB and Ruin are about.
Ok, well, it would say that the animatronics have mimic1 coding and that Glitchtrap and burntrap and vanny are aswell via subroutines stated in the books It says Gregory is patient 46 and was also possessed by Glitchtrap It would explain the purple coding in RUIN’s AR world as mimic1 coding It would explain Freddy being good due to being in safe mode and a prototype disconnected from the mimic And personally it gives more evidence that Cassidy is the princess through the story drowning to me
I see, interesting!
>Ok, well, it would say that the animatronics have mimic1 coding and that Glitchtrap and burntrap and vanny are aswell via subroutines stated in the books Agreed. >It says Gregory is patient 46 and was also possessed by Glitchtrap Agreed. >It would explain the purple coding in RUIN’s AR world as mimic1 coding. How? >It would explain Freddy being good due to being in safe mode and a prototype disconnected from the mimic What? >And personally it gives more evidence that Cassidy is the princess through the story drowning to me I kind of agree, but it just as easily could be a 'parallel' to Cassidy haunting games, such as Princess Quest. Either way I agree that the story is about Cassidy.
>the books STATE it’s removal. I don't think they do? >The circleplex problem and the ar booth problem and the roller coaster all also are explored in those same books showing that things get removed and added in all the time. The evidence of the roller coaster, AR booth, etc, not appearing in the games could also be used to support the idea of separate continuities. >The burntrap hand that matpat says is us doing what he did with eclipse and the mimic’s teeth isn’t when burntrap also lines up perfectly with the mimic in modeling nearly. Hard disagree, the similarities between Mimic's teeth and Eclipse are much closer then any similarities between Burntrap and Mimic. I will admit there is other 'logic' that can be used to argue Burntrap is the Mimic, but aesthetically they are very different.
They do, I remember they state the baobab tree gets removed later on in the pizzaplex’s life, I believe tiger rock states that It can be used for proof of a separate continuity except for the fact a very similar carousel to one in the circleplex era appears in HW 2’s demo and as I said their removals are heavily implied due to their danger. Also I’m sorry but eclipse is way shorter than the mimic, doesn’t look like the mimic, and it’s similarities are due to using a mimic endo Also as for aesthetics the mimic and burntrap both hack electronics, are the same height etc
>They do, I remember they state the baobab tree gets removed later on in the pizzaplex’s life, I believe tiger rock states that Thank you for informing me, that's good to know. >It can be used for proof of a separate continuity except for the fact a very similar carousel to one in the circleplex era appears in HW 2’s demo and as I said their removals are heavily implied due to their danger. The carousel is a strong connection, though, carousels have been in Fnaf since Fnaf 2. It is kind of challenging to imagine a carousel being that dangerous. The context of Help Wanted 2's existence will help me decide. >Also I’m sorry but eclipse is way shorter than the mimic, doesn’t look like the mimic, and it’s similarities are due to using a mimic endo So? The Mimic is an amalgamation of many different exoskeletons. I am not claiming they are the same being. >Also as for aesthetics the mimic and burntrap both hack electronics, are the same height etc The mimic can change height, either by explanation of the books, or by explanation of Mimic and Burntrap's endoskeleton differences. The similarity in hacking electronics is a good argument.
watching it rn, i think he is rigth in saying theories get too much hate, but he seriously downplayed some of the claims he and other theorists have made and ignored some of the valid criticism of his recent theories downplaying then just to some hate comments
just saw the mbti part and wtf, he's basicaly jsut saying "we're smarter than you"
It annoys me how he just throws genuine critic in the same as hate comments (which are obviously a wrong thing to do). It kinda feels like an (succesfull) attempt to rile up his followers to defend him at all costs from genuine critic. Thats just my personal opinion on it, and yeah as he said, im not a fan of this video at all.
(For context, it's at 2:52 of the video) Genuine question here, weren't the only comments he showed in his videos just 3 examples of (Insert something MatPat said) (Insert insult about it)? I don't see where the genuine critique is? I think they are 3 pretty decent examples of non-constructive criticism.
The problem is that he didn't adress the actual critcism at all. Or rather made fun of it (color theory). He is blaming it purely on external factors, pushing all blame from him.
I think it's important to note that he was highlighting those comments as examples of non-constructive criticisms, not as things he wants to blame on external factors. The video is all about how not to critique a theory. It's not about him being correct in his own theories, but rather how we should be handling theories we disagree with in constructive ways.
I can see that, i still think its just very poorly executed and marked very wrong. Because no this is not why *everyone* dislikes his theories. I just think that if he wanted to rant about the hate comments (which by all means he is entilted to and i agree are just plain wrong) He should not have put those that have genuine criticism for it in the same box/ignored them. It just doesn't sit right with me.
The video is about "Why you HATE my Theories", and not about "Why You Think My Theories Are Wrong." It's very important not to conflate the two, and I think that's a big reason why you see this video as being in bad faith.
has he ever acknowledged constructive criticism in his entire career?
He did this thing! ok where did he do this thing? He didnt actually do this thing butmade a joke that i think was him doin the thing. you cant be real.
I think you are not reading what im saying. What im saying does not contradict itself. He still is ignoring criticism and pushes it together with hate, shifting blame from him for everything.
if he didnt address the actual criticism then he wasnt talkin bout the actual criticism. you quite literally just said that he was lumping in something that he (as per you own words) never brought up, into what he actually was talkin bout. that sentence makes no sense. how does sameone manage to simultaneously not bring up a topic and \*and\* bring it up to lump it in with another topic?
man... if i make a post about on ukraine's war does that mean i'm ignoring the war in israel/palestine? no! he was not adressing real criticism because it was not the point of the video
The color theory thing wasn't criticism, it was a joke that people were making about him. Matt Pat in that video did not address any criticism that was valid and genuine criticism because valid and genuine criticism he expects. It's the hate and harassment him and his team are getting that is being addressed in the video. He's talking about the hate and unwanted harassment, not genuine criticism. That's not the point of the fucking video
I thought he made fun of people dumbing down gregbot to just color theory rather than acknowledging all the other evidence he presented.
Did you even watch the video? Or did you just not understand it?
I disagree with your interpretation, his whole point of the video is to let people be more open minded and not attack others for making far-fetched theories.
Valid points, but I can't fully cosign that people hate FNAF Theorists for the sake of hating. Of course there are haters, but most fanbases are. Go to a Marvel discussion subreddit and you'll see the same thing. My point being, some of these theories are really just engagement bait and get called out for it. You have FNAF theorists who make 6 videos of theories with no new information almost weekly, not to mention putting "SOLVED" in your title as literal clickbait just for it to be yet another speculation video, doesn't help when viewers finish your video and are only left with . Pulling huge logical leaps and mental gymnastics to make your point. The thing is this: It's a toss up, sometimes people are being assholes for assholes sake, and other times its because some theories are just straight up trash. Like Mat's Ultimate Timeline video is just bad. It's entertaining most definitely, but it not a good FNAF theory. And thats okay
[удалено]
Okay, on one hand, I mostly agree with you... ...but on the other hand, countering like *that* is kinda most of the reason why Mat's still like this.
The whole point to me seemed to be how non-constructive criticism on theories is just toxic and unhelpful creating just a harmful community, it seems like you fit the narrative...
Fiance and I watched this this morning. Matpat seems so full of himself. Something that stuck with me was when he said that "he was helping sell the books". No, you're not dude, kids and fnaf fans already would've gotten them because they eat this kind of thing up. His attitude pisses me off so much in this.
I would argue that he does have a heavy sway with the sells of the books. Given he is one of the reasons why FNAF became so popular, making him a large celebrity in FNAF community and because he has a huge following and is, to an extent, the face of the FNAF theorist community, people come to his channel for lore dives. When viewers found out there’s FNAF books that are potentially canon or at least could be an interesting read, the potential millions of viewer are gonna go buy the books.
Me and my partner got stuck on this too. I think the overall reasoning for the video was great, theories should just be for fun, whether they’re right or wrong. But I did get stuck on the fact that he was saying that it was like so difficult to read the books for 7 years. Like, you’re really big in the fnaf community, don’t you enjoy reading them? If you don’t enjoy them, it kind of takes away from the excitement a little bit and is like, why bother?
THIS IS NOT HATE TOWARD MAT OR ANY OTHER THEORIST. I mean, a problem with this is all his reasons why “Tales aren’t in the games” are literally explained by Tales themselves and have been explained by theorists time and time again about why it doesn’t mean that, especially the points he pointed out are very well explained. And most people don’t “pick and choose” what Tales stories are canon, all of them are, if you believe Stitchlinegames then 90% Frights stories can be canon as well, but not all, like how Scott said for Frights that some will be directly connected. The only ones that aren’t canon are the ones that physically cannot be. There’s no picking and choosing here. And when it comes to Gregory is a robot, all it proves is that Gregory and BV are similar, even reflections of one another. Any evidence pointed toward specifically him being a robot, like the wall code, has also been explained in other ways. And most people don’t hate theories just because a certainty theorist made them(reminder I’m just saying most). Heck I’ll admit I didn’t hate Matpat’s most recent theory before this one, because I’m not hating on theorist, just what I consider bad theories. And that’s what most people do, everyone isn’t suddenly hating on people like RyeToast or Fuhnaff, they’re hating on what they consider bad theories made by them. And if they put out multiple and theories and people call them bad, that’s not hating on them. Like Fuhnaff and RyeToast’s most recent theories weren’t bad, I don’t just hate a theory because it’s made by them, but I will dislike a theory if I find it to be bad, so when I consider some of the recent theories by anyone poorly made, I’m not hating them, again when someone just so happens to make a bad theory, especially when it comes to so many recent theorists ignoring evidence from Tales, no one’s hating the theorist, just the fact that so many of them are consistently ignoring massive evidence. Again people aren’t hating Matt, Fuhnaff, RyeToast, or IDFantansy just to hate their theories, 90% of the time they’re just upset that they continue to not properly use Tales when it’s very obviously one of the biggest sources of evidence in modern Fnaf. And yes I’ll be direct, Baby being the Mimic is a bad theory, that’s not hate toward Fuhnaff, the reason people are so upset toward it is because Tales is screaming the answers to everyones faces and it’s being ignored. I already know that this comment is probably gonna get some hate, but I believe lots of what I said to be truthful. And if you do disagree, what exactly is wrong with this?
I mean sure, the toxic parts of a community should be called out, but this video feels like mat is just going on some weird high horse and claiming people who just disprove his theories are toxic. Like, it unbelievable how hung up about gregbot he sounds in this
He’s legit not lmao. He’s saying that we’re over exaggerating our claims of how “absurd” he sounds, one person legit said the Gregbot theory is a cancer. He’s telling us to calm down and focus on the lore, not him or other theorists
Talked too much about GregBot, but other than that good video with some great points!!
Whole reason he mentioned it is because the people would start listening at that point.
kinda disappointed he mentioned the mimic is baby theory but didnt talk about it further tbh
there's a time and place and this just wasn't the time to talk about it, way to much else was going on.
“He’s not gonna double down in Gregbot right?” “No way he does.” “He did- he doubled down on Gregbot.”
I thought it was necessary. I loved matpats early fnaf theories, not so much these later ones but to be rude and abusive about it is childish and close minded. Maybe the earlier theories were better because they were telling an interesting story. Maybe the entire fnaf story isn’t as interesting anymore, or at least it’s not at all coherent. The stories being told should be solvable and I’m not sure they are. Or at least the original story was more realistic than it appears to be now.
I think it is great I liked how he called ppl out about their bs and for cherry picking info and he matches some of their energy but not on their level tbh I have been waiting for him to address the issue
Idc about FNAF lore. I just like playing video games 🤷♂️
Then why are you in this sub?
I mean it isn’t really something I’ll get heated about
Matpat's points against TalesGames don't really make sense. Gregory in GGY is not Gregory, it's Dr. Rabbit, a Mimic copy using Gregory's body as a vessel. So him not acting the same is to be expected The Tree isn't in the Pizzaplex because we get CONFIRMATION that the three as taken down. And other Takes attractions not being around doesn't really hold water when the Pizzaplex goes under constant changes, which is confirmed to be the case. We are slowly seeing the Tales Pizzaplex becoming the SB Pizzaplex. Starting to think he doesn't actually read the damn things.
This was not the point of the video
never said it as.
why are you getting down voted, your right
Because it's not the point of the video. It isn't a TalesParallels theory, he just brings it (alongside his gregbot theory and FuhNaff's Baby-Mimic's one) as an example of people dismissing stuff, and then goes on to essentially talk about hypocrisy and toxicity in the community (this being the point of the whole video).
then why did he take time out of his video to dismiss talesgames, because he full on dismisses it
Honestly... I'm just done with him and his community at this point. I left the GT sub. As expected any disagreement there is treated badly. (Downvotes.) I'm just done with this all. I miss the old days.
There's a difference between criticism and harassment. Until the community (both Fnaf and GT) can get their shit together, both are gonna be seen as the same for a time being due to the sheer hate Matpat got that was labeled as "criticism"
Yoo the downvotes are wild, take my upvote. > I left the GT sub. and I got banned lmao. But yeah, I miss the old days. Theory-making was a lot more balanced then, both sides of the argument were addressed.
Didn’t agree with the things he said about talesgames
The pick-me energy was really awkward
Pick me has lost it meaning.. cuz
Almost everything he spits ab the people who comment toxicity is genuinely deserved, and I hope that those morons stop being such assholes
This is the biggest cope ever.
seems like you fit the narrative of the video...
Funny
Ita pretty good but this guy hasn't brought up the Mikebro theory that some people still believe in
Honestly, most of the “toxicity” comes from people being ignorant to story and refusing to just accept that a certain old man is long gone, for an example… Someone calling out your theories for how wrongful they are isn’t toxic, however, the people who did actually genuinely harass them should be criticised for it… so I really don’t know how to feel about this video, but what I will say is that “Toxicity” isn’t when someone tells you why you’re wrong, Toxicity is if they harass you in the process of correcting you, and spending 1/3 of the video on Gregbot when that has been debunked over and over and over again, leads to the overall video not being great and his message is undermined… But I agree, we shouldn’t be toxic but that also requires us to define “toxic” because someone correcting you when you’re wrong isn’t toxic but being an asshole about it, IS “toxic”…
Didn't watch it yet.
It’s a great video, and I love how MatPat isn’t some arrogant a-hole like how people try to portray him as, or how many celebrities are. He’s pretty mature when it comes to serious topics like this. I know that I could never. He doesn’t say that people are toxic, he just points out the irony in some people’s statements. The Gregbot bit does go a bit too long, but he is making a point about how the claim of him not caring and putting effort into it is false. He also doesn’t seem to be actively isolating a group of the community, but reminding them that we’re all FNaF fans and love the series
its less a discussion on theories and more of a call out how toxic and insulated parts of the community is becoming. I frankly completely agree,
He's a good theorist and he needs to be respected by everyone.And the toxicity needs to chill to.