Thread:TheFreddyFromThePizzaria/@comment-26062370-20151105005506/@comment-26186871-20151107005047

Mr. Mark Twain wrote: Mr. Mark Twain wrote: If you'll listen...

This schematic was of my own making.

The Non-Canon list typically has canon characters in logical situations while not taking place in the canon.

The "Other" list has a plethora of nonsensical roleplays.

Besides, considering you are a newcomer, who are you to judge how something is grouped? Non-officially grouped, that is. My point is this - it's not even an official grouping, and doesn't deserve to be picked apart in such a fashion.

This is why I dislike the FNaF 'extremist' theorists - they see one single word out of place (Are we not human?), and they interpret it as some large clue - making a mountain out of a molehill, as the saying goes. That's what updates and bugfixes are for. If it wasn't a clue, it would have been removed in an update.

And the fact is, it is simply because I have found a break of logic in the grouping systems. It's basically disproving your set of groups, to prove that the OFFICIAL grouping mist be something else.

And yes, I am a theorist on the matter.

This is why I dislike most of the "theorists", when they see a piece of evidence against thier case, they blame it all on Scott. When I see a piece of evidence against my thoery, I use MORE evidence in the games to prove my point. Or.. I change my theory to go along with it!

Now, there seems to be great evidence in the FNAF World trailer that it is a sequel to FNAF3.

"They've scared you.." "Now they're cute." This is a reference to all the jumpscares of all the FFP locations. However, FNAF World changes that, and now they're cute. (Or, WILL be cute sometime after 2023)

This also disproves the notion of the adventure models and normal models of being separate entities.

Anyways, yeah.. I wonder where we can find the official grouping? Or do we have to theorize on that, too?

Meh, KrazyStew probably has it.