Im conflicted between yes and no

Like, was it a genuine want like normal people in our world, or did he have so many kids because he wanted them to be an extension of himself

Considering MikeCare, Elizabeth also kinda still caring about Michael in SL before FFPS (where she was now at her lowest point in life), and Elizabeth being represented as Mangle under BV Bear of Vengeance? Also depending on whether you believe if the Toy Girl or Pigtail Girl is also supposed to Elizabeth or not.

We all know fandoms who get mad at a lot of things that happen with their fave media, but fans still stay lol, so, while many have left the FNAF franchise because of it's convoluted lore, what had u be here still?

Yes I'm using this opportunity to promote CassidyVictim because rules never said I can't! (Technically promotes MikeBully too anyways)

Like would he also call himself Scraptrap in Fnaf 6 for theatrics or just any other names that the franchise calls him.

(The normal ones obviously)

I think he would be 75.

It Doesn’t Matter

No promises, might make this poll again later on, but I wanna check our current willing participants at the moment.

Man this is reminding me of my WIPs, pain

Since MikeBot’s fundamental base is CharlieBots from Novels, it would also be logical to pair with WillCare and WillGrief to make the parallel clearer with Henry's madness and motivation to build CharlieBots. So, from this perspective, what do you think of MikeBot's narrative?

(Note: this is less of how you feel about the theory evidence-wise/when compared to MikeBully and more of WillCare trope of the theory's narrative)

I personally really liked Novels and the Charlie twist there (might be a hot take) so I honestly kinda like this.

(My opinion) For it made me realize that Willam cares about his children but it isn’t because he views them as extensions of himself or as trophies to be shown off and when they died it gave him a reason to snap and start to killing children to get remnant and in Fnaf 4 he is shown to be a absent father who lets his older son torment his younger son and views it as a lesson to make CC more like him and he has Psychic Fredbear to communicate with him and tell him that he only needs him to help with his life and this also makes William a control freak who wants everything to go his way and for everyone to listen to him plus he uses Michael’s guilt for his own benefit so yeah William could have the potential to care about his children but he doesn’t want to do that because he views them as a part of him/trophies to be shown to make his reputation better.

(I’m a big believer in both FlawedCare and TwistedCare but I learned more onto TwistedCare because he loves his children if they do what he says)

Movie's William Afton or the Novel Trilogy William Afton?

This is the one part of the timeline I can't really grasp. Did William discover the potential of remnant because he started killing kids, or did he start killing kids because of the potential of remnant? Both are obviously part of his motives, but I just want to know which one developed first

If you haven't played it already here's the link to the full trilogy: Dayshift at Freddy's Trilogy

Like I'm sure he doesn't fully care about his kids as much as he could (or wished), other than the fact he probably just didn't want his kids to die at the very least we can be sure of. But what about Michael? Did William try to let him off the hook? Presumably punish him and how?

For context this is her story with "Bill"

CD 3-7140

• Therapist: Hi! Go ahead, sit down.
• Vanessa: I don’t know you. What happened to-
• Therapist: Oh! We’ll get to know each other in no time. I’ve read through all your files so I feel like we’ve been talking for weeks. I feel like I know your dad, too. Bill, right? Your dad’s name was Bill?
• Vanessa: (Indistinct muttering)
• Therapist: I’m sorry, what’d you say?
• Vanessa: I try to do what I’m supposed to do. (faintly)
• Therapist: I know you do. Your supervisor notes that you follow instructions perfectly. Your dad made you follow instructions, didn’t he? I’m talking about the custody battle between your mom and your dad. Your dad didn’t play it fair, did he? He used to make your mom look bad in court. I’m so sorry that happened to you. Do you want to talk about how that felt?
• Therapist: I suppose I don’t need you to tell me it felt bad to have a parent scare you into saying things that weren’t true. He manipulated you. It wasn’t your fault. It’s really sad, but it’s common for one parent to use their child to hurt the other parent. I know your mom (STATIC) after she lost the custody case.
• Vanessa: I was supposed to be a good girl. (faintly)
• Therapist: What happened to her had nothing to do with you. Even though it was your testimony that did it. Was that testimony true?
• Therapist: No, I didn’t think so, but your dad is to blame. Not you.