>>544690524
>is what seriously popularized it by getting kids into it
>Maybe I was too old for it when it started
I'd prefer to change that to kids on YouTube. I mean I was speaking from personal experience, I grew up reading pastas, was in the prime age for Fnaf to be scary back then. The grand total was, it's a game, so people can play and react to it. Content made for easy consumption, as opposed to "boring" reading or listening to pastas. Slender was popular in my circles, but I don't remember checking outside of them at the time. Still big enough for a movie, much earlier than Fnaf too.
>every new popular horror game is shit like poppy's playtime
picrel, can only agree there. There's some outstanding horror games, but like everything else, 90% of things are bullshit. Same with horror. Go play Dead Letter Department, edge of my seat. Terror, not jumpscares.
>didnt fnaf have that stupid 80's type retroshit game
Fnaf's been hitting the retro style for a while. Allusions in Fnaf 4, the comedy and daytime presentation of Fnaf Pizza Sim, then the bombshell of Security Breach. It saw how popular those parts were and went further.
>most of the people playing Resident Evil back in the 90's were probably kids
Point is playing, not watching. Fnaf is like wrestling, spectator sport. Good with fake situations and reactions, rule of cool. Back in the 90s people had less easy access to videos and consumption. Poppy playtime hinges on a select few 10-90s long moments of interaction within 30min-2hours of each chapter. Not too fun if you're not actively breaking the game. So it's perfect short form content. Or longform if you want to follow the formula of
>Play a bit, talk to audience
>Thing happens, act accordingly
>react
>talk to audience once things get boring