By the time Five Nights at Freddy’s 3 came out, it had been just over half a year since the first game’s debut. The low budget feel and ongoing lore had solidified the series as a popular mainstay, although for many, a modicum of franchise fatigue was beginning to set in. Though each game features its own take on the core gameplay, there’s only so much mileage that you can get out of such a simplistic premise, and Five Nights at Freddy’s 3 demonstrates the beginning of that central idea wearing thin.
Five Nights at Freddy’s 3 sees you taking the role of a newly hired employee of Fazbear’s Fright, a haunted house-esque attraction based on the events that the previous two games covered. For whatever reason, you’re tasked with watching over the grounds overnight to make sure nothing catches fire. By the second night, however, your boss joyfully informs you that he found a “real one” when he was searching for props to fill the place with, and this animatronic of course doesn’t take long to start walking around and trying to kill you. Worse yet, the conditions in the building make it so that your character occasionally hallucinates, seeing horrifying approximations of the original cast of characters.
Much like the first game, the main gameplay loop focuses on using a series of grainy CCTV cameras to track the movements of your certain doom. The twist this time is that you have nothing to hide or defend yourself with; your primary defense against the roaming “Springtrap” monster is an audio cue that can be played to lure the creature from one room to another. It wouldn’t be a Five Nights at Freddy’s game without some limited resource, however, and here it takes the shape of the security systems frequently breaking down, necessitating a lengthy reboot that critically forces you to take your eyes off the cameras.
We rather appreciated the simpler approach to gameplay here, as it makes the experience more of a skill-based game of knowing when and where to fire the audio cue to lure Springtrap away and buy yourself some precious time. The tradeoff with this, however, is that the horror elements are far less effective; the reliance on basically babysitting one animatronic makes this the least tense game yet. Sure, the ever-looming threat of one of the phantom machines jump-scaring you is still real, but these lack the kind of heft they did in the past games and almost come at expected times. Case in point, every time you see Freddy walking by the window, you know for a fact that he’ll jump at you in the next five seconds. Considering that Five Nights at Freddy’s 3 sells itself as a horror game first, we felt rather disappointed at the relatively watered-down scares this time around, especially given the highs that the previous two games were able to hit.
Luckily, the visuals remain just as creepy and unsettling as they’ve ever been, perhaps a little more given that the place you’re watching over is explicitly designed as a horror attraction. Dingy corridors, empty-eyed animatronic heads, and flickering lights are all par for the course here, and though you only really have to worry about one figure lurking through it all, this layout is still effective at building an uneasy atmosphere. On the other hand, the audio design is a little less impressive, with the ‘sting’ sounds played during jump scares lacking that kind of sharp punch necessary to get you to leap out of your seat. Five Nights at Freddy’s 3 isn’t bad by any measure, but neither is it particularly good; this is easily the most skippable entry so far.
Comments 20
Man you guys really don't like this series.
To be fair, your criticisms aren't wrong. I liked the sound design though.
All I know about these games is that they make for rubbish screenshots for your review articles. Anyone else out there just see black?
I hope you guys review SaGa: Scarlet Graces Ambitions. I'm eager to know how it handles the usual SaGa conventions (breakable weapons, no experience points, etc.).
My only question is : Which one of the 4 FNAF I should start with ?
This series is one of those things that started out as an interesting concept but then they just tried to cash in on the culture phenomenon status while it was a super popular thing.
This series is so iconic, they should really put in more effort and change up the play style. Make a whole new survival horror game with the already well established characters everyone knows and loves. At this point they need to do more than a sit in place and wait for jump scares. The series has way more potential than just relying on the original mechanics.
All three "Freddy's" reviews by Mitch... man, this is tough.
I hope he has some Kirby games to play in between those.
I'll bypass the games in order to be surprised by Paul W S Anderson's movie adaptation. It is in the works right??
The most enjoyment I've received from this series has been the theories on the lore. Five minutes of playing was more than enough to know it wasn't something I'd enjoy on my own.
3!? I can't tell any of these games apart lol (granted I haven't played them; I can't actually see when this game gets fun.)
@gurtifus I would say: start with the first game to get a taste of what the gameplay is like. It's the simplest in the series and easy to get the hang of.
@gurtifus I'd definitely say the first one. The series has a charm and if the first one doesn't hook you, it's hard to recommend the rest. I've enjoyed playing all of them with my son who just sits there waiting for me to get scared, but I've grown to really like the characters and the craziness of the story.
@gurtifus First one for sure, the build up to the jump scares is way better there. The sequels have less than impressed me so far.
@JayJ If you’re only working as an indie developer, you kind of have to do that. Especially if it’s something people can get tired of in a year. Theories about the lore don’t make money.
Hey, Nintendo Daily people, Mitch or whoever else is in charge of these reviews. Can you at very least have the dignity to use thumbnails actually from the game? You've used the same fanmade Splinx models from like, 2014, for all of these FNAF thumbnails.
I know you don't care about the games but, for the sake of pretending to be competent, don't use fan art for the thumbnails?
None of the characters in the picture even show up in FNAF 3
@Kimiko133 I agree they should change the thumbnails but was the comment about competence necessary?
@MH4 Maybe not? But the lack of care they're showing by doing that is frustrating. Using unofficial fanart, repeatedly, for all three games so far.
It seems VERY unprofessional and kinda hurts my view of this site which I've been using for news for quite a while.
@GrailUK "They made three Mario games!? I can't even tell them apart! He just keeps jumping" "They made three Sonic games?! I can't even tell them apart! He just keeps running!" "They made three Donkey kong countries?! they-" And etc. That's what you sound like
@Kimiko133 I agree that it’s unprofessional and frustrating, but if you want your constructive criticisms to be taken seriously, please be polite about it 😃 I’m sure the author would appreciate it, seeing as how most writers are open to criticism as long as it’s presented in a polite manner.
@Kimiko133 I hope I sounded like someone struggling to see the attraction of these games. And you sir are a lousy salesman lol
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...