Template:Vital article

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Video games C‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game C This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks: Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Horror C‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

Five Nights at Freddy's: Fazbear Frights books are releasing, with Into the Pit and Fetch already being out. The article should be expanded periodically (three more are planned to come out by the end of the year) to include these books for currency.

The origin falsely states that this was an original idea dating around 2014, when the fact is that this entire game franchise is based on the Five Nights at Freddy's movie from 1987.

• Five Nights at Freddy's
• Five Nights at Freddy's (1987)

How could anyone who is working on this page not know of this origin? --— Preceding unsigned comment added by KaelumYodi (talk • contribs)

 No such thing,I don't know why you would even attempt to claim this,but its sort of funny.Yeial (talk) 15:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The fandom page is clearly a fake. An animated film from '87 will have been well documented, and there clearly isn't one. --Masem (t) 22:08, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think it would be appropriate to make a page for William Afton/Springtrap ? I'm fairly certain that hes notable enough outside of the fnaf fanbase to be worthy of a page, especially with regards to meme culture and stuff. AshSuki (talk) 14:44, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do it Glitchtrap on the internet (talk) 23:46, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, it doesn't meet the notability requirement unfortunately, maybe in the future perhaps. AshSuki (talk) 17:09, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There were a couple of edits introduced recently that I really think should have been discussed before it was enacted. First off, the topic of whether the games included in the Fazbear Fanverse (especially Five Nights at Freddy's Plus) should be included as "official spin-offs". I personally think that they should not be included as "official spin-offs" as they are only published by Scott/Clickteam, the original creators have full creative control over the games, and, as far as I know, they are still owned completely by the original creators. In my opinion, they are simply fan projects that Scott is helping out in. The other subject is whether Special Delivery (and Ultimate Custom Night, as well, I guess) should be considered a main game or a spin-off. According to the spin-off article, a spin-off is "any narrative work, derived from already existing works that focus on more details and different aspects from the original work". Another definition is that a spin-off "is usually meant to indicate a substantial change in narrative viewpoint and activity from that (previous) storyline based on the activities of the series' principal protagonist and so is a shift to that action and overall narrative thread of some other protagonist, which now becomes the central or main thread (storyline) of the new sub-series." Given these definitions, I believe that Ultimate Custom Night and Special Delivery should not be considered spin-offs as they are not substantial changes in viewpoints as they are still about the events and characters surrounding Freddy Fazbear's Pizza and still contain some of the same narrative threads as the rest of the games. I think these topics that I've mentioned should have been discussed first before being edited, but I'd like to hear what others think about these subjects. ArojamDharkon (talk) 21:50, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree this topic should be cleared out. I don't know if there's a point in discussing what is a spinoff and what isn't, but I think Fanverse should simply get separated from the rest. This topic is currently a mess on the page. FNaF Plus is added to the "Spin-Off" section, but Fanverse is put far to the bottom, on Cultural Impact > Fandom > Fazbear Fanverse. I think it should be set straight; one or the other. My suggestion would be to either add Fazbear Fanverse under spin-off or as a separate section other than main series and spin-offs. FNaF Plus definitely SHOULD NOT be highlighted from the Fazbear Fanverse as it is currently. Every Fanverse project is equal to each other. FNaF Plus may be a remake/reimagining of FNaF1, but it's a non-canon addition, equal to all the remaining games. (source) This project should be held equally, so FNaF Plus has to be either removed at all, or put somewhere along with all the remaining Fanverse games. In my opinion, in the "Games" section under a new "Fazbear Fanverse" sub-section, but you could very well keep it near the end of the page where "Fazbear Fanverse" sub-section currently is.

Regarding UCN and Special Delivery, I agree these games should be considered a part of the main games. Both of the games follow the main storyline and have similar gameplay. Ultimate Custom Night was initially meant to be simply an update, an extension of the previous game. Buzzek (talk) 17:07, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If it's officially licensed, then it's official, simple as that. I added the other fanverse games as a compromise, but regardless of whether or not they're all considered equal, there's a clear difference between a fan being given the license to develop an official remake of a main title, and a fan having their already fanmade project made official. AshSuki (talk) 13:27, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't really a big difference between one and the other, as Phil is still working on a fangame. Scott isn't involved in that development other than overseeing it (just like he does for the other project) and it's not a canon remake. It's a new story with FNaF1 as its setting. Just like other creators make new games for their existing projects, Phil is making a FNaF1 fangame, after his FNaF2 fangame (AFFOS) was taken down for being too similar to the original game. It's especially important to make that clear because it causes a big confusion in the community. Other than that, I saw your edit was reverted and we really simply need to come to some agreement on this discussion section, and then make an edit on the page. I still think the best solution is to add a new sub-section for Fanverse, as it's a bit different project from the other games. Buzzek (talk) 11:04, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with what you say. I think that a fair compromise would be to include it in the "Games" section, but under its own "Fazbear Fanverse" section. As to whether the developers of the Fanverse should be included as "Developers" of the franchise, I don't think that they should be included as they are not officially part of the franchise, but the fangames included in the Fazbear Fanverse are still important in a sense to the franchise, if that makes any sense. ArojamDharkon (talk) 02:22, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heya Buzz, I'm late but under Wikipedia's standards and the general usage of the terms "fanmade", "fangame" or "fan labour", the moment these games become funded and given licensing rights by the copyright holder, they stop being fangames. Especially since FNaF Plus is a case of someone being given the license to remake an official FNaF game, which isn't the same as having a fangame made official. The "Fazbear Fanverse" games are just as official as the canon FNaF games. According to Kane Carter, Scott himself even considers the Fanverse games to be spinoffs.

--AshSuki (talk) 01:32, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think Ultimate Custom Night at least should be included with the other major FNAF games since the games lore is integral to the franchise, even though it looks like a spinoff (talk) 01:47,25 January 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darthepokefan (talk • contribs)

I think due to the fact that they're official games in the franchise, they should be added to the spin-off section. That includes every game in the fanverse. AshSuki (talk) 17:11, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All information in this article already exists within the Five Nights at Freddy's page. It's also the only Fazbear Frights story to have a separate page and it doesn't really have notability apart from being a Five Nights at Freddy's spinoff. ItsMackie (talk) 20:08, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the Security Breach section, please change "the game's pot" to "the game's plot". Adamk33n3r (talk) 09:19, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:09, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can somebody please change the part about Vanny saying she is a possesed rabbit animatronic, The game clearly shows us that she is a human. It would make more sense to say "A human who is possesed by Glitchtrap/Mallhare" (talk) 1:51, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

if in one of the endings Vassena is Vanny but in others shes not.

Vannesa = Vanny: The one where freddy commits arson and they run to the roof and vanny is there, freddy jumps and pushes Vanny off the roof, Gregory runs down the fire exit and takes Vannys mask off and its Vassna.

Vanny = Anamtronic: in the Vanny ending at the doors if you get to Vanny's office and you disassemble her she gets torn up but theres no blood.

How you may ask? Maybe because vassena is not human or was and was made a anamtronic! By the one and only glitchtrap/malhair.

Gregory: the bite victim has brown hair, Gregory has brown hair, they look pretty much identical. Freddy brought Gregory to the medbay because he felt the frontlobe missing and thought it was torn out. So Gregory = Bite victim

Glamrock's: Bonnie got destroyed so badly at Bonnie bowl that he became unusable, or one of the workers did it because why did they have monty golf before monty was out? Because Bonnie's suit is the one Vanny is useing! It was destroyed and Vassena stiched it back up. And Freddy helping Gregory, why doesn't he stop his friends? Because hes acting. He was planning to kill Gregory but got attached to him.

Therorys by me Squidgame199 (talk) 18:06, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the mini-games section of the article, It states that ¨ In the mobile version of the eighth game, the player can access a mini-game called "Princess Quest", which depicts the origins of a character called Vanny.¨ To my knowledge, no mobile version of "FNaF: Security breach" (the 8th game) exist, nor is the Princess Quest mini-game only found in that version. I don't know where people got this from, but it should change to say ¨There is a Mini-game Called ¨Princess Quest¨ which depicts the origins of a character called Vanny¨ with no mention of a mobile port or that its found in that port. Yeial (talk) 14:20, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So apparently and Mobile version of "FNaf: Help wanted" exist (which I had no knowledge of prior) which has a mini game of Princess quest on it. How ever the article for Security Breach States that it's the 8th game. Some Clearing up of which game is in order of release woulld be nice. Yeial (talk) 14:35, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The last sequel for the Five Nights at Freddy's Security Breach released on December 17, 2021. The following sentence doesn't contain this information.

"The sequels were released on November 10, 2014, March 2, 2015, July 23, 2015, October 7, 2016, December 4, 2017, June 27, 2018, May 28, 2019, and November 25, 2019, respectively." Rbalex452 (talk) 13:12, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done by User:MarvelDc2003 SpinningCeres 01:57, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

the amalgamations include ennard,blob and molton fredyd 174.95.155.98 (talk) 23:02, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:15, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nowdays the franchise is iconic, but this type of lore put into the game has to have some sort of effect on scotts mind. And to think that a normal happy game designer became successful via horror because his attempt at a happy game was deemed scary. ADHD and i hate speedy accusations of bs ChiserYT (talk) 18:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It should be mentioned in the article how controversial the different interpretations of the plot can be. 76.190.44.178 (talk) 16:45, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed on the release timeline for the series, Fazbear Fanverse games are listed, I'm fine with this, but if we're including these games, shouldn't POPGOES Arcade (2020) be included? The game was released before the Fanverse was officially announced, but the game is not going to be updated/modernized for the Fanverse (unlike the Five Night's at Candy's games). Would that not qualify for it's inclusion? I've also seen Kane Carter (the developer) claim it as a Fanverse release, but I cannot get a good source on that exactly. JeremyDoesSS (talk) 23:26, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, while this may not claim it as "releasing with fanverse" But I do have this tweet from Kane Carter, and the official game page, which both claims it as a Fanverse game, and released. So take that as you will. JeremyDoesSS (talk) 23:52, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if other people are thinking this same thing or agree with me, but I think that having the main release timeline is too big and clunky. It technically can't even fit all the releases mentioned in the article (as shown in a recent edit by MarvelDc2003). I think having this big huge timeline is a bit too much. I think that it should be removed and we should just stick with the two separate timelines (a video game timeline and a book timeline). That's just something I noticed and wanted to see if people agree with it. ArojamDharkon (talk) 07:32, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to add that in FNAF 4, the phone call ambience is a backwards recording of phone Guy from FNAF 1 A9ollo (talk) 15:40, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:41, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]