WillStuffed Cannot Reasonably Explain GGGL

I do not think that either WillStuffed or PuppetStuff are "confirmed". They are both fine theories.

WillStuffed has very good evidence. However, I think that overwhelmingly, PuppetStuffed is the obvious way to interpret GGGL. I've never heard a reasonable alternative interpretation, and I find this fact hard to ignore.

Any WillStuffed interpretation of GGGL forces you to bend over backwards to come up with a contrived excuse to ignore the literal events that the minigame is showing. GGGL directly shows the Puppet putting the suit heads onto the bodies, with the text "Give Life". There's very little room for interpretation!

That's the core of my argument for PuppetStuffed, and I find it fairly convincing. However, there are still counterpoints to address, good and bad.

The Good Counterpoints

WillStuffed is explicitly canonized in both the novel and movie continuities

This, to me, is the best argument for WillStuffed. It is notable that neither the novels nor the first movie feature the Puppet, however. I suppose it's still possible for movie 2 to feature PuppetStuffed as a twist reveal, but it doesn't seem likely.

FNaF1 had already established WillStuffed

I would argue that FNaF1 gave no explanation for how the bodies ended up in the animatronics. Most interpreted that the killer stuffed them, simply because it was the only good accessible explanation at the time (PuppetStuffed was not "accessible", because the Puppet was not an established character). But, arguably, the game did not imply anything in particular. It was a dark spot that Scott had left open to fill in as he pleased later on.

My argument here is not totally satisfying, though, which is why I think this is serious evidence for WillStuffed.

What about William's motives?

William's motives are a theory extrapolated from evidence (obviously). If you extrapolate a theory from evidence A, ignoring evidence B, and then discover that the theory contradicts evidence B... then you should reconsider your theory! Don't disregard evidence A, obviously, but reinterpret it in light of evidence B. Specifically, William's motivations should be interpreted with GGGL in mind, from the very beginning.

That all said... WillStuffed does fit significantly better with the way William's character is described by later parts of the series. He's obsessed with control, particularly control over death, achieved through expirimentation with emotion and possession. Arguably, this isn't particularly relevant, since William's character surely hadn't been developed at the time of FNaF2. However, I think that Follow Me's existence in FNaF3 suggests Scott was already thinking of William as a mad scientist of sorts, even fairly early in the series. With everything else that's been established, PuppetStuffed would stand out as a bit of an odd choice.

The Bad Counterpoints

GGGL could be more symbolic, as the masks are similar to the masks in Happiest Day

Look at the proportions in GGGL. Those aren't masks, they are the heads of the suits. On the other hand, the children in Happiest Day and the bullies in FNaF4 are very clearly wearing masks. Maybe this is taking the minigame details too seriously, but personally, I see a very clear visual distinction.

All of the other FNaF2 minigames are fairly literal. Really, I think that essentially all of FNaF's minigames are fairly literal (even FNaF3's), though this isn't agreed upon. Obviously, there is an inherent abstraction to the arcade presentation, but I think there's a pretty obvious distinction between the arcade elements and the story elements.

Why does GGGL leave out Cassidy?

Probably the same reason as Follow Me? To be clear, GGGL does not show that the Puppet doesn't stuff Cassidy, it just cuts before we can see it happen. Because, y'know... Scott likes to present Golden Freddy as especially mysterious, or obscure. I could be wrong, of course, but I'm doubtful Cassidy's exclusion is particularly meaningful as far as the story is concerned.

Can't the Puppet just be "guiding the souls" to the vessels?

I don't think so, simply because this is not an established mechanic of the universe. The way possession has always been demonstrated, the souls possessing the suits is a direct result of the bodies being stuffed. There has never been shown to exist an intermediate step, where the souls must be specially "bound" somehow. Stuffing has always been sufficient. If there were, say, a Fazbear Frights story where something like "guiding the souls" happens, then I would take this option more seriously. But no such story exists, to my understanding.

Can't GGGL be a failed Happiest Day?

I find interpreting "Give Life" as "Give Afterlife" to be incredibly silly. That is obviously not what Scott was saying, please be reasonable.

What about Henry's line?

"No one was there to lift you up into their arms, the way you lifted others into yours."

If GGGL is about possession, then this wouldn't make sense, because Charlotte possesses the Puppet. Luckily, under PuppetStuffed, GGGL is not about possession! It's about the Puppet putting the bodies in the suits! Please pay attention! Charlotte didn't have anyone to "help" her the way the MCI did, she possessed the Puppet essentially by coincidence (as shown in the Security Puppet minigame).

On the other hand, Henry's line does seem to contradict the "failed Happiest Day" theory, because he says explicitely that GGGL is Charlotte "lifting others into her arms". If it's a failed Happiest Day, then Charlotte does not actually manage to help the children, so Henry's line does not fit.

WillStuffed is more narratively satisfying

I agree. I think Scott does too, considering WillStuffed is made explicit in both the novel and movie continuities. But this is FNaF2 we're talking about. If Scott had been putting serious thought into the overarching narrative of the story at that point, he probably wouldn't have made SAVETHEM. I suppose you could argue it's the retcon, but it doesn't seem to fit the description.

GGGL is the only evidence for PuppetStuffed

This is roughly true! It's also roughly true, for example, that Mike's monologue in Sister Location is the only evidence that he's William's son. But it's damn good evidence! Because it gives the answer explicitely!

An Optimistic Conclusion

I would love to be wrong about this. All it would take is a "good enough" alternative interpretation. I have yet to find one, however. At present, it seems that WillStuffed requires Scott to have created a minigame explicitely depicting an incorrect account of the bodies being stuffed. From this, we can either conclude that the Puppet stuffed the bodies, that Scott simply made an extremely misleading minigame, or that we just need to think about it longer.

Though this post has a particularly pessimistic attitude with regards to GGGL's explainability under WillStuffed, I do want to emphasize that it's by no means impossible. We shouldn't stop looking, per se. Does Autobiography of a Yogi hold the answer? Considering it's 566 pages long, I'll probably never find out, personally. But perhaps someone else will. If you think you're that person... send me some citations, or something.