Author Topic: Five Nights at Freddy's Thread  (Read 4860 times)

Offline Numbers

  • Powerful Wizard
  • ******
  • Posts: 1278
  • Gender: Male
  • Just call me '93458093463' if you want.
Five Nights at Freddy's Thread
« on: August 23, 2015, 09:41:36 PM »
We've been talking about this randomly over the past day or so, so here it is. It's now a thing. You're welcome.



So, after the mass heart attack the first game caused before the sequels slowly descended into mediocrity, what are your thoughts?
I have no mouth, and I must scream.

Offline Birdy

  • Silly Adventurer
  • **
  • Posts: 95
  • Gender: Female
Re: Five Nights at Freddy's Thread
« Reply #1 on: August 23, 2015, 10:18:35 PM »
Ooooh boy! *claps hands excitedly*

First had potential to be a great game, but sequels were lacking in variation, making it basically the same game over and over. Also, the first game did it right by using a simple mechanic and the uncanny-valley look of the animatronics to it's advantage, making something that was supposed to be fun and family friendly totally terrifying, while later games made the usual horror mistake of going overboard on the creepy, thus becoming less effective and more generic.

Offline GrahamRocks!

  • Magical Genie
  • *******
  • Posts: 2169
  • Gender: Female
  • Hoooot!
Re: Five Nights at Freddy's Thread
« Reply #2 on: August 24, 2015, 08:46:40 AM »
I'm the exact opposite of both of you, as I already said earlier. I liked each game that came out, and I'm honestly quite surprised to find some people don't like the series past the first one.

Also, am I the only one who never believed the whole "Phone Guy is the villain" thing?

Offline Birdy

  • Silly Adventurer
  • **
  • Posts: 95
  • Gender: Female
Re: Five Nights at Freddy's Thread
« Reply #3 on: August 24, 2015, 08:50:32 AM »
I did for a while, until the second one came out. Then it got kinda fuzzy.

Offline Numbers

  • Powerful Wizard
  • ******
  • Posts: 1278
  • Gender: Male
  • Just call me '93458093463' if you want.
Re: Five Nights at Freddy's Thread
« Reply #4 on: August 24, 2015, 01:00:31 PM »
You're right about that whole uncanny valley thing.



In the first game, they start out as what could pass as a believable "family friendly but can be scary to kids" model, sort of what happens when a clown's makeup goes horribly wrong and ends up scaring the kids instead of entertaining them. In the fourth game...



They look like something that crawled out of the pits of hell itself, which doesn't mesh at all with their purpose as mascots. And yeah, I get that the implication is that it's the kid's imagination that makes them that over-the-top looking, but it comes at the cost of making them look more generic than scary. Honestly, I think the porcelain china doll-esque appearance of the new animatronics in FNAF2 was more creepy.

They've said that the fourth game is the last one in the series. Yeah, sure it is. Especially with a movie coming out. I'm dreading the day they let the success of this series get to their heads again and say to themselves, "What the hell, let's do another one. Maybe we can give the player a shotgun so it'll be like Doom."
I have no mouth, and I must scream.

Offline GrahamRocks!

  • Magical Genie
  • *******
  • Posts: 2169
  • Gender: Female
  • Hoooot!
Re: Five Nights at Freddy's Thread
« Reply #5 on: August 24, 2015, 01:42:43 PM »
Implication? I thought it seemed pretty clear it's all in his head. Hence the term "Nightmare" used for them.

Offline Numbers

  • Powerful Wizard
  • ******
  • Posts: 1278
  • Gender: Male
  • Just call me '93458093463' if you want.
Re: Five Nights at Freddy's Thread
« Reply #6 on: August 24, 2015, 03:10:23 PM »
I never said I doubted they were nightmares. And while we're on the subject, doesn't it seem a bit redundant to have hallucination enemies in the third game, followed up with nightmare enemies in the fourth? Would it be that hard to have animatronics that are actually there, and not just the player character's imagination? It doesn't help that, as I've said before, the "nightmare" variety of animatronic doesn't look like anything that could logically exist in this world. They have more rows of teeth than a friggin' shark.
I have no mouth, and I must scream.

Offline GrahamRocks!

  • Magical Genie
  • *******
  • Posts: 2169
  • Gender: Female
  • Hoooot!
Re: Five Nights at Freddy's Thread
« Reply #7 on: August 24, 2015, 03:35:24 PM »
*shrugs*

Offline Birdy

  • Silly Adventurer
  • **
  • Posts: 95
  • Gender: Female
Re: Five Nights at Freddy's Thread
« Reply #8 on: August 24, 2015, 03:53:05 PM »
Also, if they're just nightmares in the fourth game, then how do you ever get a game over? As far as I know, dreams/ hallucinations can't physically kill you, unless they're Freddy Krueger or something.

Offline GrahamRocks!

  • Magical Genie
  • *******
  • Posts: 2169
  • Gender: Female
  • Hoooot!
Re: Five Nights at Freddy's Thread
« Reply #9 on: August 24, 2015, 05:44:48 PM »
Well...

Spoiler (mouse over to reveal):

Offline Numbers

  • Powerful Wizard
  • ******
  • Posts: 1278
  • Gender: Male
  • Just call me '93458093463' if you want.
Re: Five Nights at Freddy's Thread
« Reply #10 on: August 24, 2015, 08:23:35 PM »
So...provided you try looking into the pointlessly convoluted and complex plot that you get bits and pieces of via minigames, some of the plotholes might not actually be plotholes. I guess.
I have no mouth, and I must scream.

Offline Birdy

  • Silly Adventurer
  • **
  • Posts: 95
  • Gender: Female
Re: Five Nights at Freddy's Thread
« Reply #11 on: August 24, 2015, 09:36:55 PM »
Hmmmm. I find this whole Bite of '87 thing would be a lot more intriguing and disturbing if it were just brought up and then left alone in the first game. The mere implication of it is enough to skeeve you out, but expanding too much on it kind of ruins it. That's also probably why these sequels don't quite suit my fancy. What little story the first one had wasn't immediately apparent and was shrouded in mystery, and probably should have stayed that way. The others did a poor job of expanding on it, leading to the rather convoluted mess we have now.

Offline GrahamRocks!

  • Magical Genie
  • *******
  • Posts: 2169
  • Gender: Female
  • Hoooot!
Re: Five Nights at Freddy's Thread
« Reply #12 on: August 24, 2015, 10:13:03 PM »
It seems like I'm the only one here who liked it... *sigh* Of course, it's just been us three talking about it. Part of me wants to quit this thread while I'm ahead, since I'm the exact opposite of both of you.

Offline Numbers

  • Powerful Wizard
  • ******
  • Posts: 1278
  • Gender: Male
  • Just call me '93458093463' if you want.
Re: Five Nights at Freddy's Thread
« Reply #13 on: August 28, 2015, 05:24:00 PM »
The problem with most horror sequels in any medium is that they tend to retread old ground, based on the fact that if it worked once, surely it'll work a second time (The Blair Witch Project 2). And a third (Jaws 3D). And a fourth (Paranormal Activity 4). And a seventh (Saw 3D). And a tenth (Jason X).

What do all of the above have in common? They all sucked, sure, but why? Because they added nothing new that hadn't already been done before in the first movie.

Now let's look at the rare horror sequels that worked. The third Exorcist movie, for example. The second Exorcist is so bad that the third ignores it entirely and goes in its own disturbing direction, with probably the best jump scare in cinematic history, along with a legitimately creepy villain played by Brad Dourif. The weakest part of the movie? The actual exorcism scene at the end, which had already been done before in the first movie, and was only in it because executives demanded it. The movie would've been just fine without retreading old ground.

How about Aliens? The movie still had callbacks to the first (good old chestbursters), but it took what the first film had and actionized it. The first one was all about suspense and terror, while the second film ratcheted up the action a notch while still retaining that feeling of dread the first one had, about the potential loss of someone you care for, and the notion that what happened to your friends out in the field could just as well happen to you. It didn't retread old ground, at least not at its expense.

What do the Five Nights at Freddy's sequels do? They all do the same damn thing the first game did, except the animatronics look uglier with each sequel. The best thing you can say about the fourth game is that the setting is your house instead of at a Suck E. Cheese's, and that you can move around...for a few feet. But it doesn't add much new to what the first one had already done. It feels like they just gave up with the jump scares, and said, "I don't know about the new sound effect, just mash the first three screams all together and see what it sounds like. I also read a gross fanfiction called Cupcakes once, so let's get that cupcake in on the action."
I have no mouth, and I must scream.

Offline Numbers

  • Powerful Wizard
  • ******
  • Posts: 1278
  • Gender: Male
  • Just call me '93458093463' if you want.
Re: Five Nights at Freddy's Thread
« Reply #14 on: October 12, 2016, 04:22:44 PM »
Hey, guess what? Thread resurrection, because the day we all feared has come at last...

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYLtN0xsOLA" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYLtN0xsOLA</a>

Five Nights at Freddy's 5, even though the 4th one was supposed to be the last one.

Yep, this series is still around. And as the Honest Game Trailer points out, there's...an RPG? And a book? And I hear they're making a movie out of it? Seriously? How much more mileage can you get out of this overexposed franchise? It's had its 15 minutes of fame. Just let it die already.
I have no mouth, and I must scream.

Offline Birdy

  • Silly Adventurer
  • **
  • Posts: 95
  • Gender: Female
Re: Five Nights at Freddy's Thread
« Reply #15 on: October 12, 2016, 07:45:43 PM »
Crap, I forgot all about this thread...

Well, considering they're all basically made by one guy and are still raking in tons of cash, they'll probably keep being made until people stop buying them. I'm guessing Scott Cawthon needed a new car or something this time around. It's a bit of shame it grew into this bloated monster of a franchise, considering the first one had at least a little creativity to it. It probably could have been fondly remembered as that weird indie game that was kind of cool and different, but nope. This happened.

Offline Numbers

  • Powerful Wizard
  • ******
  • Posts: 1278
  • Gender: Male
  • Just call me '93458093463' if you want.
Re: Five Nights at Freddy's Thread
« Reply #16 on: October 13, 2016, 02:34:01 PM »
Well, at least we got this amazing Newgrounds flash game out of the deal.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTlZAJ9Yp68" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTlZAJ9Yp68</a>
I have no mouth, and I must scream.
 

anything