Monday 29 June 2015

Top Gear on Reflection


Top Gear on Reflection

So the final episode of Top Gear was played on BBC 2 on Sunday and at the end all I could think was ‘that was weird’. Something just felt so strange about the experience. I have no idea how many years the show ran for but I grew up with it and now it’s gone and it is genuinely sad.

 

Top Gear was built on the comradery and chemistry of its presenters. From its origins of a humble car show it became one of the most recognisable television shows worldwide. When you get right down to it the show was three mates messing around in a bunch of strange scenarios whether it be expensive super cars or piles of scrap they bought for a couple hundred quid. It was full of humour and hilarity and even occasionally an emotional moment that made you genuinely feel quite good about yourself.

 

There are so many great moments I couldn’t possibly mention them all. In a way the final episode was similar. I laughed a lot watching it, Clarkson’s line, I hate working on Top Gear really got me. It was good however the two films weren’t the farewells I’d always imagined from Top Gear. In a way it was fitting, the last thing Clarkson did was drive a £250 car cut in half through a muddy field towards an extravagant house full of smartly dressed people in a convention for some environmental thing. It was what came after I found strange however.

 

Watching Hammond and May close the show felt incredibly sombre. Hammond looked ready to well up and there was no acknowledgment of the elephant in the room, no talks of the future, simply the TWO of them said thanks for watching and Goodbye. It’s always goodnight said at the end of a Top Gear Episode. Then the credits came up with the usual black background and white text.  There was the simple change of no music, instead a silence lingered over the screen. It almost felt like there’d been a death, it felt meaningful as did that first line, “Hello and welcome to what’s left of Top Gear”.

 

I’d be incredibly surprised if this is the last we see of the three of them together, equally Top Gear on the BBC will be back, we already know Chris Evans will be hosting which for what it’s worth I think is a good choice. It is the end of an era though. It’s strange, I always imagined Top Gear would in in a barrage of tyre squeal, explosions, the Stig removing his helmet with those three morons all there before declaring that on that bombshell it’s time to end. The expression on the faces of Hammond and May said it all however. There’s genuine sadness to see it go, not bad for a pokey motoring show on BBC 2 I suppose.

 

Leave your favourite Top Gear memory in the comments, there are so many but personally I think I’d have to say the Reliant Robin test, it was so incredibly funny. I’m not really sure how to end this, I kind of want to say something fitting but I’ve got nothing. Not much of a bombshell really is it.


https://www.facebook.com/pages/Thecoolstuffblog12/1807956062763462


Sunday 28 June 2015

Can Video Games be Art?


Can Video Games be Art?

This is a question asked by gamers everywhere. It is a question answered by none gamers as no way now go back to the basement. Let’s face it however, these people are pretty ignorant so let’s take a look into the argument with intelligence and logic.

 

I’ll start with that all so common argument, video games cannot be art because art has no purpose. A painting is simply there to be looked at while a video game is there to be played. True, however this definition of art seems rather restrictive and surely the purpose of art is to have no restrictions and to allow an artist to create their own vision without shackles. The definition of art in fact is as follows: The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.

 

The first part talks of an application of human creative skill and imagination. I’ve never created a video game but it’s obvious that it takes skill and imagination to create. Video games are often compared the films, however I find this comparison to be unfair. I’m not going to try to argue one is harder to create than another, that’s not fair but both have unique challenges to overcome. A video game can look great, sound great and have an enthralling story but if the gameplay is poor then it isn’t a good video game. The interactive element is the key element in a video game and if a game plays badly then its good story and visuals are wasted and may as well have been a film. The opposite side to this argument is a film has to keep your attention without any interactivity, games can fall back on good gameplay to keep you interested. Name the most well-known video game franchise. I’d say Mario which has little to no story for the most part, it’s about the gameplay. A movie meanwhile has to be interesting on its own without player interaction.

 

Producing works for Beauty or emotional power. If you play games then it seems highly likely a game has impacted you emotionally at some point. When people mention art and games the one that springs to my mind is Shadow of the Colossus. That game made me think, it was artistic to me and it was an emotional experience. It made you question yourself every time you killed a Colossus and yet when you fight them you’re taken over by a wash of determination as the music builds up and you begin that feeling of an epic struggle. Seems pretty artistic to me.

 

I could keep mentioning the definition but earlier I mentioned art being un-restricted. What is artistic varies from person to person. Personally I found Shadow of the Colossus an emotional and impactful experience and many other games delivered on a similar scale. My favorite game ever made, Professor Layton and the Lost future not only had a beautiful visual style, it had extremely likeable and relatable characters with interesting arcs, it had a gameplay style of puzzles that challenged you on an intellectual level and a story that kept me hooked from beginning to end and almost bought a tear to my eye at the end. That to me cannot be described as anything other than art.

 

Art is in the eye in the eye of the beholder, if someone tried to convince me that Professor Layton and the Lost Future isn’t art by some dumb technicality I’d tell them they’re pretentious and idiotic. I went to a modern art gallery in London a couple of years ago, I nearly gnawed my arms off out of sheer boredom. At one point there was a grey canvas. A GREY CANVAS, and if I’d talked to a lot of the people in that place they’d say my video game isn’t art at all. Art is a different thing to each person so to answer the question that started all this, can video games be art? Yes they can, to claim they’re not is to claim you’re idea of art is the only one that is correct.

 

Thanks for reading, share your own opinion and if you enjoyed like the Facebook page.
 
 

Wednesday 24 June 2015

Why Do so Many People Hate Call of Duty?



Why Do so Many People Hate Call of Duty?

When you think of the most successful video game franchises what springs to mind. I’d be very surprised is Call of Duty wasn’t up there somewhere. The strange thing about this franchise is it seems to have just as many people who hate it as it does who actually buy them. People blame Call of Duty for stagnating the game industry and promoting a lack of innovation. They say it has one hell of an annoying fan base full of angry 12 year olds and it’s the worst thing ever made ever. I’m going to discuss this today.

 

I’ll start by saying this, I don’t like Call of Duty. It’s not really my thing, military shooters are not one of my preferred genres especially considering I prefer to play by myself and leave multiplayer alone. I will happily admit that parts of them are enjoyable, the co-op missions in Modern Warfare 2 were fun to play with friends and some of the Zombie modes were fun for a while to play with those two friends. I find the premises to the stories hilarious for how ridiculous they are and it’s pretence at realism is kind of endearing, like a small child pretending to be an old man. However, I do not own a COD game, I probably never will and I don’t like them a whole lot. I do not HATE them however like many do.

 

Many gamers point at them as the big casual game that suckers in all the casuals and is making developers want to dumb down their games into Call of Duty clones. The casual gamer argument is an odd one, yes I get that for some gaming is a genuinely hobby and some just play occasionally in their spare time and there is a difference between that. Gamer Entitlement is a dumb issue, acting like people who aren’t as hard core as you shouldn’t be allowed to play games is really dumb, if you think hard core players should be the only people allowed to games then you are quite clearly pretty dumb.

 

The thing is I’m pretty sure people like this are a minority so I’ll discuss the second point. The stream of games who try to be Call of Duty is very annoying, we all know of the franchises that once had a unique premise but the developers try to turn them into Call of Duty because it sells lots of copies. The thing is though, Call of Duty isn’t to blame for this, COD set its ground work to sell well and form its fan base. Other companies should take the blame for trying to copy Call of Duty, not Call of Duty itself.

 

The fan base full of angry 12 year olds is definitely worth mentioning. Yes they’re annoying but also very easily ignored and more importantly are really funny. I have a friend who once convinced an entire match of random people that if they could copy his actions on the map exactly they would unlock a hidden emblem. He lead them on a ridiculous little tour and at one point was walking along a thin pipe. One angry 12 year old fell off the pipe and they all started panicking for me and my friend to enjoy laughing at their idiocy and they cried about having no hidden emblem. Yes they’re annoying but at least you can laugh at them.

 

Most importantly I think in the argument for the hate of Call of Duty is how they basically bring out the same game every year. The type of game it’s equated to is the like of FIFA and Maden, bro games that just release some updated team rosters and refined gameplay each year. The thing is I’m a football fan and FIFA is a great game for me. I imagine if you like that sort of thing Call of Duty is the same. There’s no denying that Call of Duty works incredibly well, the controls are good, the graphics look good, as a FPS it works extremely well. If you want a multiplayer FPS then really I can see why you’d buy it every year.

 

All these points are all well and good but there’s one more reason I don’t hate Call of Duty … lads of other people do and a strange part of my strange and warped mind likes that I disagree. Whatever you think on gaming’s biggest franchise leave a comment, like the Facebook page and enjoy playing what you like. I’m going to stop typing now, all this COD talk is boring me, I’m going for a game on Battlefield.



https://www.facebook.com/pages/Thecoolstuffblog12/1807956062763462 
 

Saturday 20 June 2015

Are Disney Films Sexist?


Are Disney Films Sexist?

 

Disney has released many timeless films over the years, classics that we’ll still be watching in a hundred years’ time. They usually have the hero’s prevail and give a good message but one issue has always been lingering over these films, that argument of sexism. While some people would just say that it’s just a kids film and it shouldn’t be taken so seriously many, myself included would argue that kids look to role models and good examples should be prevalent to a growing child. Not only that but media already indulges stereotypes too much, surely it’d be a good thing for adults also to have characters they can relate too. Today I’m going to look into this issue.

 

Firstly what films do things wrong? Sleeping Beauty stands out in my head as the typical Princess. She gets rescued by a prince and has no real personality, she’s just there because she has to be. Not exactly an interesting character to put things likely. Many early princess stories from Disney get hit with similar criticism, Snow White and Cinderella are often said to be poor role models. I however am not so sure.

 

Snow White while does end with the falling in love happily ever after thing does have some very admirable qualities. She acts as a motherly figure to the dwarves, she takes care of them and is often working as a Mother. Is this really a sexist character, a kind person who is always working away to take care of her loved ones? Cinderella is similar, she’s working non-stop while on screen and treated awfully but after working hard is rewarded with her own happily ever after. Then again I would assume it’s the falling in love with the prince that’s the sexist bit. However I think that saying this is a poor role model to children is not looking at the full picture. Firstly these stories were written a long time ago when this sort of thing was more acceptable, more importantly however I would argue it’s understandable that someone in the position of one of these characters would want something like that.

 

Walt Dinsey’s favourite fairy tale was Cinderella because she works hard for a long time and then is rewarded with everything she ever wanted. I think that’s a good message to have, working hard brings good outcomes. Is it also worth noting that the princess falling in love in a few glances is an argument that goes both ways, it happens to the prince too. I’ve never really saw this as a sexist event in a film, rather an exaggeration of what real people really want. What is the purpose of a fairy tale? To tell a story to make us feel good and let us enter the world of the story in our imaginations? Is it sexist to say that going to a place in our imagination where you are loved and rewarded is a bad thing? A child imagination is an incredible thing, these don’t make them think a man will do everything for them, rather it helps them imagine and believe in good.

 

These are old films, newer films have really made an effort to make the female characters more real and interesting. The Princess and the Frog is a fine example, the male and female leads in that films are portrayed as equals in ability despite their different classes and upbringings and they work better together than apart. Neither were bland stereotypes, both were interesting characters with flaws and goals. I never found Belle that interesting because she was a little too prefect but I didn’t have that problem with the Princess and the Frog. Frozen goes one step further by having Anna and Elsa’s relationship having such focus as well as making the typical prince the villain and forming a romantic relationship over time. Both these films are trying to have good role models for kids without sacrificing character to do so and while I like the Princess and the Frog a lot more than Frozen both have good intentions in their morals and messages.

 

One film I do take issue with in this discussion is the little mermaid. Ariel in that films spends loads of time whining and expecting to get everything she wants and unlike Cinderella or Snow White she never has to work. She never grows as a character either, Ariel wants the prince so Ariel gets him and forget consequences for all her selfish actions. This I think is a lot more sexist than many of the films people take issue with.

 

I could mention more examples but I think all this boils down to what you consider sexist in what are designed to be family films. The happily ever after ending is used to make people feel good and pleased for the characters, not to degrade women. The important thing I think is what people take away from the experience, not necessarily everything that happened. People recall that Cinderella married the Prince, not worked hard to get to that point in the first place. What’s important to remember is how many people enjoy these films and characters for being interesting and fun. A lot of these female characters have their flaws or obstacle to overcome in situations we will never be in but they’re more interesting for this. Giving your female character flaws doesn’t make you sexist, it makes the character more interesting and relatable to people.

 

If you’re sat there thinking I’m just one of those ignorant males then you know what, maybe you’re right, I don’t know what other people are offended by but personally I don’t see much issue with sexism in Disney. Take that for what it is but I would like to hear the other side of the argument if you disagree. Thanks for reading and don’t forget to like the Facebook page linked below.


 https://www.facebook.com/pages/Thecoolstuffblog12/1807956062763462?ref=bookmarks



Tuesday 16 June 2015

The Dark Origins of Everyone's Favourite Fairy Tales


The Dark Origins of Everyone’s Favourite Fairy Tales

Doesn’t everyone love Disney? Those classic fairy tale stories bought to life in beautiful animation with a level of charm and overall pleasantness about them. However many of these stories have origins that wouldn’t be quite as charming to us all. I’m going to take a look at some today and afterwards you won’t quite be able to look at your favourite Disney Princesses in the same way again.

 

Cinderella.

We all know this classic story. Cinderella is deprived of any freedom by her Step Mother and Step Sisters and treated as a slave. With the help of her fairy Godmother she goes to a ball where a prince falls in love with her. As the clock strikes midnight she is forced to leave and losses her glass slipper. The Prince searches the Kingdom for the girl who can fit the slipper and they all live happily ever after. The original version is similar for the most part, it doesn’t change until the Prince arrives with the Slipper at the house with Cinderella and her step sisters.

 

The step sisters are obsessed with getting their foot into the slipper. The first one tried but cannot get her big toe into the slipper. The step mother handed the women a knife and told her to cut off her big toe as once she was a princess she would no longer need to walk. Yep isn’t that lovely? What’s better is it works. The prince goes away with the step sister but soon noticed a trail of blood coming from her foot. He brings her back and the second sister has a go. Her heel however cannot fit so the step mother hands her the knife and says the same thing. She is also noticed to be leaving a trail of blood and he comes back and Cinderella puts on the shoe. So yeah chopping off parts of a foot and you know what, this is by far the least strange story I’m going to talk about.

 

The Pied Piper

This story is pretty disturbing already and I imagine a few of you already know it but it’s definitely worth a mention. When the town is invested with rats the people offer lots of money for the Pied Piper to lead all the rats away, when he does however the town folk refuse to pay up so the Pied Piper leads all the towns’ children away.

 

Where are the children taken exactly? More modern renditions say the children were taken to a cave  and the townsfolk agree to pay to have the children back which is already pretty creepy. Older versions however state that the Pied Piper took all the children to a river. I’m sure you can see where this is going, the Pied Piper drowned an entire town’s population of children. All except for one, a lane boy who couldn’t keep up with the rest of the children. Someone needs to explain to me who thought telling this as a children’s story was ever a good idea.

 

Sleeping Beauty.

Sleeping Beauty is a really boring story, let’s be honest. It’s the most generic prince rescues princess and they fall in love story you’ll ever find. Well originally it had what we’ll call a unique twist. The story begins in the same way, Sleeping Beauty pricks her finger on a spinning wheel on her fifteenth birthday and is sent to sleep by the evil Maleficent. The Prince eventually comes across her sleeping body but doesn’t kiss her to wake her up like what you know. Here things become completely bizarre.

 

The Prince for some reason still falls in love with this sleeping princess, however he doesn’t wake her up by kissing her, he’s not even the one who wakes her up. He becomes so in love with this sleeping body he decides to … have his way with it. You read that right, the prince undertakes in what is basically necrophilia. Sleeping Beauty becomes pregnant and nine months later gives birth to twins still without waking up. When the twins are attempting to breast feed one of them not knowing what it needs to do with the mother still asleep suckles on her finger dislodging the splinter from the spinning wheel waking Sleeping Beauty. Glad that didn’t happen in the Disney version?

 

Beauty and the Beast.

This one is really weird as the parts cut off the original story seem so out of place. Belle used to have 2 older sisters and her Father was a merchant. One day her Father was going away and asked what they would like to have bought back from his trip. The sisters asked for expensive gifts of a necklace and earrings while Belle said nothing. However she was eventually convinced by her Father to ask for something she says she wants 3 roses on a single stem. He finds the first two gifts with ease but struggles to find the roses until he stumbles across them in a garden. He takes them but runs into the monstrous beast who agrees to let him go if he gives up his daughter to be his wife in a few months’ time.

 

Belle is sent to the tower to be the Beast’s bride to be. The Beast and Belle do not talk a whole much however they do share a bed. They start off side by side but the Beast leads her with a kiss until it gets to a point where she cannot sleep without him. When she sees him in the courtyard and thinks he’s dead she weeps over his dead body he returns to his normal self. The Beast’s Father had a sorceress transform him into a beast when he would not marry someone he did not love and the spell could only be broken when he was loved as a hideous beast.

 

It’s a little weird imagining the Beast and Belle sleeping together but this wasn’t exactly strange, especially compared to the other stories. The weird thing however is the story does not end there. Belle brings her Sisters and Father to live with her after she marries the now prince. The two sisters however are insanely jealous of Belle and they drown her in a bathtub. Yep Belle is drowned by her sisters because she was happy. The story does not end there however. The sorceress that turned the prince into a beast brings Belle back to life and tells her the only way to punish the sister sufficiently is to turn the sisters into stone columns. The only way to break this curse and change them back is if a man can fall in love with them as stone columns. I thought I was pretty weird but there’s no way in hell I could make that up.

 

I don’t think I can quite look at some of those Disney films in the same way again. In the meantime however thanks for reading. Please leave a like on the Facebook page and tell me if there’s any dark fairy tales I didn’t mention.
 




Thursday 11 June 2015

What exactly happened in Five Night's at Freddy's part 2 - Answering those all important Questions


Answering those all Important Five Nights at Freddy’s Questions

 

Today’s the day I attempt to solve Five Night’s at Freddy’s. If you haven’t read the first part of this theory, I recommend you do, while not 100% necessary it will give more context to what I’m saying here (Here’s the link http://thecoolstuffblog12.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/what-exactly-happened-in-five-nights-at.html ). I’ve scoured everywhere from YouTube to Reddit to my highly impressive brain and these are my findings.

 

Firstly, who are shadow Freddy and shadow Bonnie? They seem really important but not in an obviously apparent way.To cut to the chase I think they are the phantom versions of Freddy and Bonnie and here’s why. Firstly, a phantom for Bonnie and Freddy are noticeably missing from FNAF 3 and while there is a phantom Freddy, after looking at its design closer I am convinced that it is actually a phantom of Golden Freddy. From the shape of the head, its golden tinge, the missing ear and even the slight tilt of the head there are too many similarities to ignore. Some people believe the Freddy that appears to the left of your office occasionally is Golden Freddy however due to its colouration it is more likely shadow Freddy.

 

It is my belief that both the phantom and shadow animatronics are apparitions created by the puppet. Don’t forget that the puppet doesn’t just want to kill the purple guy, this is a tormented child’s soul looking for vengeance. He attacks both Jeremy and Fritz in FNAF 2 and is in control of the animatronics that attack Mike in FNAF 1. It therefore makes sense that the phantom animatronics in FNAF 3 contribute to the player character, a night guard’s death as for years the puppet has been on a crusade to save the children from what he thinks as a child are evil night guards. Think about the behaviour of the shadow animatronics, in FNAF 2 both of them randomly appear and crash your game, which likely mean they kill you, a night guard. In FNAF 3 shadow Bonnie takes cake to a child to free his soul and shadow Freddy leads the animatronics to be dismantled, ultimately leading to the children’s souls being released. They’re helping children, just like the puppet would.

 

The only issue with this idea is the withered look of the phantoms in comparison to the clean looking state of the shadow animatronics. Here’s the thing though, the phantom animatronics were created by the puppet at a point where he intended to burn down the building, they’re apparitions of the future state of the animatronics we see in the box of spare parts looking completely fine in the office. The shadow animatronics meanwhile we created years before this plan of burning the building, long before the animatronics were scattered and dismantled. It should also be noted that aside from the withered nature of the phantoms the shadow animatronics and phantoms do share many features including the distinctive white eyes and ghostly appearance making many believe they are simply hallucinations, however I think prove they are creations of the puppet's doing.

Another difficult to place animatronic is Golden Freddy. It’s pretty much accepted that the fifth child was stuffed into the Golden Freddy suit however I don’t believe this is the case, at least not exactly. When we hear of an unfortunate incident involving multiple spring lock failures in a spring lock suit I think this was only the Golden Freddy suit that went wrong. The killer seems to have used the Spring Bonnie suit safely on multiple occasions and it only kills him when there’s rain on the ground to loosen the locks. The Golden Freddy spring suit however I think was the one involved in the incident all the way back in the original pizzeria location killing an innocent employee. The killer took the Spring Bonnie suit knowing it was okay to use and the Golden Freddy suit was hidden away. The Golden Freddy we see is an apparition, created by the Puppet. This is the ghost of the fifth murdered child in the form of the ghostly Golden Freddy. This explains his strange behaviours throughout the games, from his ghostly attacks and his disappearing when you touch him in the Save Them mini game as well as the lone endoskeleton that can be found in FNAF 1 and 2, it used to belong to Golden Freddy who is now out of commission and hidden away somewhere for good.

 

Golden Freddy is the lost soul of the fifth murdered child but unlike the others he’s not haunting an animatronic that is still in use, rather taking the form of a decommissioned and dangerous spring lock suit after being formed by the Puppet. Remember in the Give Life mini game in FNAF 2 we don’t see the puppet stuff this final child into a suit like the other 4, rather Golden Freddy’s head comes at you from the dead child, showing us how the Puppet bought this terrifying golden bear, this ghost to life.

 

The bite of 87 is a huge incident in the timeline and yet we have had very little revealed over the three games. It is scarcely mentioned however I think the key to figuring out what happens is in FNAF2. The likely victim of the bite is Jeremy Fitzgerald as at the end of night 6 he is moved to day shift with the restaurant being shut the next day with no more night shifts after this day shift in which Jeremy was guarding over due to the now obviously apparent danger. Jeremy being the victim would also explain the November date on his pay check despite being welcomed to his new summer job on night 1, he was in hospital in critical condition and thus didn’t receive his pay check until months later. This also shows us the phone calls from FNAF 2 are likely recorded the day Jeremy receives them. Before the new FNAF 4 teaser images I would’ve said the biter is almost certainly Mangle due to its larger jaw, sharper teeth and jump scare where it attacks the top of the head. However the FNAF 4 teasers do seem to be hinting at the nightmare animatronics having a role to play in this strange incident.

 

So that’s one more question answered leaving only one. The big one. The identity of the purple man. I’ll start by addressing the elephant in the room, phone guy. Many believe the phone guy is the culprit and honestly a lot of evidence does point at him HOWEVER I have the proof of this guy’s innocence in the murders and it comes from the FNAF 3 mini games where purple man dismantled the animatronics and then is crushed by the spring Bonnie suit. FNAF 3 has both good and bad endings that I’ve already mentioned. Since neither has been declared canon the events of the timeline must take place in a way for both to be possible. This means the FNAF 3 minigames must take place AFTER the events of FNAF 1? Why? Firstly we see the animatronics who are not withered being dismantled. In FNAF 1 the animatronics are in full working order and are not damaged, showing us that these events need to have taken place after FNAF 1. Also the building we see is in disrepair, there are leaks in the ceiling and rats on the floor. However the animatronics have already been moved there, showing us this is after the building was repaired and re-opened. The buildings damaged state shows us this is after the building was abandoned and after the restaurant shut down, therefore this must have taken place after the FNAF 1 building was abandoned and therefore phone guy cannot be the killer as we know he was killed by the animatronics before the events of FNAF 1, while purple guy dies in these mini games after FNAF 1.

 

The difficult thing is that the purple guy may be someone we’ve never met. However if it is someone we’ve met in the games the most evidence points towards none other than FNAF 2’s custom night guard, Fritz Smith. I have evidence and I hope you'll be convinced. Firstly the murderer must have been present in FNAF 2, the Phone Guy mentions the building is on lock down, especially to former employees. The next clue comes from Fritz’s pink slip after he’s fired. It says he is employee number 3. Who are the previous 2 employee’s? We know there’s a day shift worker and many would assume Jeremy Fitzgerald is the other. However we know Phone Guy was an employee of this location as he must have worked there to record his messages. This means that FNAF 2’s custom night takes place before the other 6 nights. I think that Fritz Smith takes the night shift of the night after the now day worker quit due to 'conditions' as phone guy puts it.

 

We also know Fritz can tamper with animatronics due to the reasons he is fired. This would explain the strange item in his purple guy’s hand in the save them mini game as well as disabling Freddy and being capable of dismantling the animatronics in FNAF 3. This could also explain the aggression from the toy animatronics who remember are not possessed by dead children, he tampered with their facial recognition software so they would react to any adult (They attack Jeremy Fitzgerald in night 1 and presumably the day shift worker), not just him. Remember he was arrested as a suspect for the first missing children incident and would thus be on a criminal database like the one the toy animatronics are linked too. Him working in the FNAF 2 location would also explain the badge on purple guys chest in the Save Them mini game that takes place in the FNA 2 location and also explain the badges absence in the FNAF 3 mini games that take place long after FNAF 2 where he was fired.

 

An important thing to note is Phone Guy talk of rumours of the company as early as night 1 in FNAF 2, he doesn’t ever say he’s just talking of the old location. Therefore the murders could easily have taken place before Jeremy’s first night. So why isn’t the killer the day shift worker? Because he’s dead. Phone guy says this day shift worker complained about conditions and animatronics tried to get into his office and then later talks about the amazing solution of the Freddy head. See where I’m going with this, this worker didn’t have a Freddy head. This is why Jeremy and Fritz were both given one, to avoid them being killed. This so called day shift worker was likely killed by one of the old animatronics as this was before purple guy tampered with their facial recognition software. This company isn’t exactly concerned about  the morale issues of covering things up, this guard’s death is just another example and while he probably didn’t enjoy his savage death this does suggest he is not the killer.

 

After all that there is still one huge flaw to my theory. The killer must have worked in one of the previous locations that used the spring suits and the safe rooms and more importantly listened to the Phone Guy’s recording explaining how they work, with the safe rooms being invisible to cameras and animatronics and how to use the spring lock suits as we know the killer used a yellow spring suit. The Phone Guy also mentioned in his FNAF 2 night 6 phone call that the building is on lock down, especially concerning previous employees. However I do have something that could strongly suggest Fritz Smith fits this criteria.

 

What is the one key difference between Jeremy Fitzgerald’s and Fritz Smith’s nights? Fritz Smith does not receive a phone call at the beginning of the night. In his first night working as a night guard Fritz receives no phone call, no training tape, no nothing. Something doesn’t quite add up unless Fritz has already received night guard training from working in a previous Freddy Fazbear Pizza location. The reason he doesn’t receive a training phone call is because he’s already known to the company and to Phone Guy for working in a previous location and listening to Phone Guy’s original recordings, the ones that explain both the safe rooms and the spring lock suits. Does this seem like a bit of a stretch? This would certainly explain where Fritz learnt how to tamper with animatronics as well as learn the skills to survive a night at the FNAF 2 location, a location with more animatronics than any other. It would also explain how the company managed to draft him in at such short notice, he was already known to them from working in a previous location. After the custom night Fritz Smith is fired and the first time we see purple guy after this event in the timeline is in the FNAF 3 mini games where the gold badge on purple guy’s chest is mysteriously gone. Coincidence? I doubt it.

 

 Fritz Smith is the purple guy, the evil man who took the lives of 11 innocent children, but eventually he was stopped by his first victim which brings us back to the very first mystery from FNAF 1 that had us all scratching our heads. The Puppet did everything he could to save the children, he bought them back to life and in the happiest day mini game he freed their souls for good. Finally he tried to stop anyone in that hated security guard uniform and stop the purple guy, Fritz Smith for good. He is truly behind it all and yet we still see him in FNAF 3 in the hallway making him the saddest case of all because his soul still hasn’t been freed even after all these years. He’s still here and maybe always will be finally giving us closure on the phrase, ‘It’s me’.

 

So that’s that … until October. If however you’re sitting there thinking about some huge flaw in my theory then I’d love to hear where I may have gone wrong. I am confident in my conclusions but equally would like to hear what everyone else thinks, it is all speculation after all so please let me know and if you enjoyed this like the Facebook page.
 
 




Sunday 7 June 2015

What exactly happened in Five Nights at Freddy's?


What exactly happened in Five Nights at Freddy’s?

Normally I like to write a mildly funny introduction to my blog posts but there is a lot to talk about with Five Nights at Freddy’s which from now on I’ll shorten to FNAF. So blah blah blah, insert funny joke here, let’s get started.

 

The FNAF story starts long before the setting of any of the three main games in a small family run restaurant called Fredbears Family Diner. How long this restaurant was open for is unknown, however what we know for sure is the event that set’s everything into motion takes place at the Diner. It’s accepted and for good reason that the Take Cake mini game is the first event we see in the FNAF timeline where we see who is likely Fredbear (Who would later become Freddy Fazbear) taking cake to screaming Children. A crying child is left outside the building and after a while we see a purple man pull up in a car next to the Diner and murder the child. We know from the tear stains on the child’s face that remain after his death matching the design of the puppets mask as well as the puppet’s jump scare which always follows this mini game that this child’s soul exists in the Puppet.

 

The negative PR from this incident makes the owners of Fredbear’s Family Diner sell the restaurant to a company known as Fazbear Entertainment. To distance themselves from the murdered child incident they rename the restaurant as Freddy Fazbear’s Pizzeria and open a chain of restaurants. It is unknown how many restaurants or for how long they are open for is, however we know there are multiple restaurants as a sister location is mentioned in the Phone Guy’s training tapes in FNAF 3. This first chain of Pizzeria’s is when the spring lock suits are introduced. These suits double as both animatronics and suits as stated by Phone Guy in his FNAF 3 recordings. These two suits are golden versions of Bonnie, who would later be known as Springtrap and the mysterious golden Freddy. The issue with these spring lock suits of course is that the spring locks have a tendency to snap shut with someone inside, killing them. In his night 4 recording in FNAF 3 Phone Guy talks of an unfortunate event with several simultaneous spring lock failures resulting in employees no longer being permitted to use the Spring Lock suits. On his night 5 recording he also mentions the Golden Bonnie suit has been notably moved, making it highly likely it’s the suit the purple man uses as his disguise for his later murders.

 

We are also told that these Pizzeria’s contained safe rooms that are invisible to both the restaurants security cameras and the animatronics programming. However Phone Guy’s recordings say they are sealed up never to be mentioned again. Finally and perhaps most importantly we know that five children are murdered in this location. We learn about this in the FNAF 1 newspaper clippings where we learn that a man used a character costume to lure five children into a back room and murder them. While a man was caught on cameras and arrested (Although it should be mentioned it is at no point said he was prosecuted) the children’s bodies were never found. The Pizzeria continued for a little while longer until it was eventually closed after blood and mucus began leaking from the original 4 animatronics, those being Freddy, Bonnie, Chica and Foxy. This suggests that the four of the children’s bodies were stuffed into these four suits with the killer using the Golden Bonnie suit as we know it is only one of two that can be worn.

 

How the five animatronics from FNAF 1 (Freddy, Bonnie, Chica, Foxy and Golden Freddy) are possessed by the dead children is shown to us in the Give Gifts, Give Life mini game. We see the Puppet, the possessed animatronic of the first murdered child try to give the dead children presents to make them happy. However after this doesn’t work with them being dead, the Puppet stuffs them into the suits and gives them life in these new bodies. The final frame before the Golden Freddy jumpscare reveals the final child is connected to Golden Freddy, showing us how these 5 robots became possessed.

 

We also know this took place in the original Freddy Fazbear’s Pizza from the Foxy Go Go Go minigame where we see Foxy run out of pirate’s cove to entertain the children. The third time he runs past the same purple man sprite before finding the five children are lying there dead. This must take place before the suits are possessed as Foxy does not attack the purple man. We therefore know that in this location five children were murdered, the safe rooms were supposedly sealed up and the five animatronics from FNAF 1 were possessed thanks to the Puppet.

 

After shutting down Fazbear entertainment eventually reopens its restaurant and the brand new Freddy Fazbear’s Pizzeria is opened. This is the only time during this timeline where we have actually been told the date as it takes place, 1987. This is also the setting for Fnaf 2 where after the old Pizzeria’s were left to rot (At least according to phone Guy) the old animatronics have become withered and damaged. Wary of another missing children’s incident and the bad press that would come with it the new Pizzeria has brand new toy versions of the original animatronics. Not only are they supposedly more kid friendly (Although I struggle to see how mangle could ever be classified as kid friendly) but they have built in facial recognition software to a criminal database to attempt to protect children and prevent another incident. The original animatronics are present in their withered state and both Golden Freddy and the Puppet can be encountered during FNAF 2. Despite all this however five more children are murdered in this location. We see this in the Save them mini game where the Puppet leads Freddy throughout an exact replica of the FNAF 2 building with five dead children scattered throughout the building.

 

Notice how the Children's bodies are in places that would
 likely make them unseen by the buildings cameras
 While we do not know when during FNAF 2 this night takes place (It must be at night due to the restaurant being empty) the dead children’s bodies are positioned on the map to likely be invisible to the security cameras and thus they could be in the building during one of the nights you play. The Phone Guy mentions a yellow suit was used during the night 6 phone call which makes it likely the murders took place during the week you play in as Jeremy Fitzgerald. On night 6 the Phone Guy also says the building is in lock down especially considering former employees, telling us the murderer is almost certainly an employee of Fazbear Entertainment. Rarely during the save them mini games Freddy is attacked by the purple man who this time has a gold badge on his chest and a strange purple object in his hands. When he catches you the screen crashes leaving you with the message ‘You Can’t’ likely referring to the minigame title Save Them (As in the children).

 

One nagging detail is how the killer managed this when he had been captured by Police years before. There are two possibilities. One is that the purple and pinkish sprites represent different people. I don’t think this is likely however as the killer must have been an employee at the previous Pizzeria in order to know how to use the spring lock suits. We know the killer uses one of these yellow spring lock suits and he can’t have done this if he was a brand new employee, partly for not knowing they were sealed in the old safe rooms and partly as he would not know how to operate them. It also seems unlikely a serial child killer with no apparent motivation other than enjoying murder as seen by the smile on his face whenever we see him in FNAF 2 would share the murdering with someone else.

 

While an investigation is going on throughout FNAF 2 the restaurant is closed down due to an entirely different reason. In FNAF 1 we are told of an incident known as the bite of 87 where an animatronic bit someone during the day removing their frontal lobe. This is not mentioned at all throughout FNAF 2’s phone calls despite the game being set in 1987, however after night 6 we receive a newspaper clip that states that the restaurant will be shut down immediately and the new animatronics scrapped due to possible malfunction, with the original’s being kept for possible re organization of the company. This makes it highly likely that one of the toy animatronics bit someone, during the day thus the restaurant is immediately shut down and the animatronics are no longer allowed to walk around during the day, being restricted to moving only at night. This must have taken place during the day shift AFTER night 6 in FNAF 2.

 

An unspecified number of years later another Freddy Fazbears Pizzeria is opened which acts as the location of FNAF 1. Some major events take place in this building. Firstly FNAF 1 itself takes place with the player character Mike Schmitt going through seven nights with Freddy, Bonnie, Chica, Foxy and Golden Freddy roaming the Pizzeria trying to kill him. After night seven he is fired for general unprofessionalism, tampering with the animatronics and odour.

 

Before the events of FNAF 1 with Mike Schmitt the Phone Guy is killed by the animatronics. We hear this happen in the night 4 phone call where he appears to be attacked by all the animatronics. During his phone calls which we know are pre-recorded in this game he also reveals some important information to us telling us about the bite of 87 and the original missing children’s incident.

 

Finally we know the purple guy dies here. We know it is this location due to it mirroring the map of the FNAF 1 pizzeria and not featuring the toy animatronics. However in the FNAF 3 minigames that take place after each night that this location contains a safe room with the spring Bonnie suit inside. This tells us this is the same building as one of the original Freddy Fazbear’s pizzerias, after Fredbear family Diner but before the location of FNAF 2. After shadow Freddy, what appeared to be just an Easter egg in FNAF 2 but played a prominent role in FNAF 3 lures each of the original animatronics to the safe room. However due to the safe rooms being invisible to the animatronics they glitch out and the purple man, this time lacking the gold badge appears and dismantles them. After Freddy, Bonnie, Chica and Foxy have been dismantled, the spirits of the five children from the first missing children’s incident enter the safe room and scare the purple man into the spring Bonnie suit. The building is rotting and in a terrible state and thus rain is all over the floor causing the spring locks to snap shut killing the purple man who is now known as Springtrap.

 

Finally there’s FNAF 3 which is set 30 years later with a horror amusement attraction is opened called Fazbear Fright to cash in on the rumours and mysteries of the old Pizzeria’s. A week before the attraction opens, a night guard is hired to watch over the building and the attractions owners find an animatronic for their attraction, an animatronic who happens to be Springtrap. He tries to kill you for a 5 nights while phantom animatronics (In a withered and damaged state) jumpscare you if you fail to upkeep the ventilation properly, distracting you to allow Springtrap an advantage to try to get you. After night 6 the attraction catches fire and burns down, apparently due to ‘faulty wiring’. Playing the game though normally rewards you with the bad ending where there are five masks, representing the five original animatronics with lights on behind their eyes, suggesting the children’s souls still haunt the animatronics. If you complete a bunch of strange minigames and exploit intentional glitches to give crying dead children cake you get the good ending, where there are only four masks (Golden Freddy’s is strangely missing) and the lights are off in the masks, suggesting the souls have been released. However the Puppet occasionally appears in a perfectly un-damaged state in the hallways. We know he’s really there as we can see his reflection in the water on the ground meaning it’s likely he was the one to burn down Fazbears Fright to try to end the purple man for good and at least for now this is where our story ends.

 

This is getting long so I’ll upload the second part in a few days. I’ll discuss all the big questions people tend to have about the series such as Golden Freddy’s identity, the significance of the shadow animatronics and of course the identity of the murderous purple guy. Meanwhile the Cool Stuff blog has a Facebook page now which is linked below. If you enjoyed this post and are interested in the next part then I’d appreciate a like on the page. See you next time and be careful, Freddy is right behind you.