Don't get me wrong I love this fandom, but it feels like people are using the books just to justify their headcanons rather than to write actual theories.
We shouldn't forget the books are first and foremost extra merchandise to sell to kids and fans.
Unless a story talks about important characters (GGY=Gregory) and/or states important dates about key moments (ex. MCI) I don't see the point of needing to consider them canon.
This whole Talbert File situation felt very fishy to me since day 1 and my gut feeling was right this time around too. A FNaF timeline is more than possible to write without the need of any book/fanfiction (outside for some dates), I feel this is a good time to realize that.
The books are fun, buy them because you want to read a funny story of angsty teens diying by the hands of some crazy robots rather than to try to fit them in the games' universe, most of them are so absurd it's really hard to do so (but I won't deny some of them can make sense).
Adding this here as I feel like a lot of people barely know what the "leaked mail" actually looks like:
Love how Scott acknowledged this but not the PinkyPills situation. I'm very convinced Scott is unable to fire her for now, hoping this will change in the future. #FirePinkyPills
Wtf are even the Talbert files? I saw a recent post of yours where someone said it was confirmed by Scott that it IS real, but ISN'T canon. So, which is it? More importantly, if it isn't canon, why are we bothering to talk about it, if it was changed to the Freddy files? It's like that one time where they changed the cover of the SB: Ruin edition files because they accidentally used concept art, and Scott knowing his fandom all too well, had to change it. He didn't want people to make theories around something that isn't currently relevant to the lore. It's concept art, after all. It's like what John Funnaff and Tom had theorized, about the animatronics being costumes at one point, using the concept art as evidence. While I have nothing against it, and these are legitimately good theories, I can't bring myself to really believe them because there's a reason it's concept art. The same stigma applies here. If it isn't canon, and a concept before the Freddy files, why make theories of something that was so ominously changed? There was a reason why they changed it. And while I don't have Reddit or Twitter, I think people need to chill out for a bit. Just saying.
So. As it turns out, according to the first two of Scott's Reddit comments today, that "confirmation" was fake, and according to the third, the supposed Freddy Files precursor was as well. And I have no idea why people are so up in arms about it other than some people vehemently saying Scott is lying about it being fake because they've seen proof of it being real, but also saying they won't show the proof.
Very much agreed that either way it does not deserve NEARLY the amount of attention it's getting given it's not canon either way, and people should take a breather lol
Talbert files isn't real well it was fun while it last... Also I was in the middle of my art so goddamn. I could still post it if you wanted but honestly I'm feeling pretty in the dumps After figuring out I just lied to all of you sorry Bros :(
While The Talbert Files has the rest of the FNAF fanbase in a chaotic frenzy it's granted me peace. It single-handedly validates what I've suspected for years that Scott bless him has been writing the story and lore by the absolute seat of his pants and I knew this because that's exactly how I write. A pancer can recognise a fellow pancer.
Edit: Well nevermind then, guess I'll go fuck myself.
so on one hand we got basically confirmation that abby is meant to parallel elizabeth cause elizabeth’s original name was abaigael but also why is it spelled like that. is it like a genuine alternate spelling or a mormon bullshit spelling. cause fnaf takes place in utah so there is a non zero chance the aftons are mormons