It is the third installment in the Five Nights at Freddy's series, and takes place in a horror-themed attraction based on the restaurant chain featured in the first two games.

[4][6] If the ventilation fails for a prolonged period of time, the player will hallucinate and their vision will be obstructed, causing phantom animatronics to begin appearing.

The player is assigned the night shifts for the week before the opening of Fazbear's Fright, while the team behind the attraction searches for items from the former restaurant to be exhibited.

On the second night, the player learns that the team discovered a derelict, rabbit-like animatronic named "Springtrap", which the protagonist must prevent from entering their office for the duration of the week.

As the week progresses, the cassette tapes discuss a variety of subjects, such as how to operate "springlock suits", which function as both animatronics and as a costume for employees.

Another tape mentions safe rooms built at each Freddy Fazbear's Pizza location, which are inaccessible to all people except employees and are unknown to the animatronics and customers.

After the sixth night, a newspaper clipping reports that Fazbear's Fright burned down under unknown circumstances and that all salvageable items will be sold at a public auction.

In January 2015, less than three months after the release of Five Nights at Freddy's 2, an image was uploaded to Scott Cawthon's website teasing a third entry in the series.

At the same time, an automated response system was setup on Cawthon's email, confirming Five Nights at Freddy's 3 to be in development and requesting fans to not ask questions on the game.

Omri Petitte of PC Gamer and Nic Rowen from Destructoid praised the reworked camera system, both believing it to be more useful than in previous game's and gave the player more reasons to use them.

Petitte wrote that the game was presented well and praised the horror aspect of Springtrap, but believed that the phantom animatronics lacked their original personalities and felt repetitious,[4] an opinion agreed with by Rowen and Vogel.

[6] Conversely, Oxford believed that Scott Cawthon had "proven his talent" at storytelling and character design, and that he chose a "good place to end things" should the series have been coming to a finish.