-

[VelVoxelRaptor]

-

 

[PurplePopplio]

Any link for the source?

 

[Beth Pavell]

Some Mongoose can be found in South Europe which back then was part of the UK.

What? Nowhere in Continental Europe has ever been part of the United Kingdom. The closest you can get would be Gibraltar, which is now a British overseas territory but has never been part of Britain or the United Kingdom

EDIT - Couple of other things occur to me - "regina" doesn't mean royal, it's Latin for "Queen" (My grammar might be a bit off). I suppose Queen Elizabeth II is the most famous queen in the world right now.

This is hardly a deeply researched mythology. For a start, the symbol of Wales is not a wyvern, it's a dragon, as you can clearly see on the flag. Secondly, St George's dragon has never been symbolic of England. Anyone who did even a bit of research into English national symbols would surely have come across the bulldog or the lion (Lions having been a symbol of English kings since at least Henry II). Frankly, Game Freak are better than that

 

[TechSkylander1518]

The "super stones" translation were misinterpreted. These stones temporarily change the typing of a handful of "super pokemon" in battle. When a stone is used, these special Pokemon temporarily have THREE typings in battle and three secret moves unlocked (which replace their normal 4 moves) - one move of each type. They also get surround by an aura that changes color depending on the type of the selected move.

Triple type combinations that will be available are:

Ground/Rock/Steel - Steelix
Grass/Poison/Ground - Venosaur
Electric/Fairy/Dark - Pikachu
Fire/Dragon/Flying - Charizard
Water/Ice/Steel - Blastoise
Ghost/Dark/Psychic - Gengar
Water/Ice/Dragon - Lapras
Water/Dragon/Dark - Gyrados
Fighting/Normal/Psychic - Lucario
Bug/Dragon/Flying - Flygon
Bug/Poison/Rock - Kabutops
Fighting/Ice/Normal - Zangoose
Psychic/Flying/Ghost - Ho-oh
Psychic/Flying/Water - Lugia
Psychic/Fairy/Normal - Mew
Psychic/Fairy/Dark - Mewtwo

Each game will have 8 "super pokemon" respectively

Analysis: Intiresting concept. Notice how they say "Translation was misinterpreted"

Yeah, I don't see any of that being likely. Most of these are types that these Pokemon can already learn-why bother transforming them and losing a move when you can already get that coverage just fine? And a lot of these would actually be pretty terrible for the Pokemon:
Steelix gains a double weakness to Fighting
Venusaur (not Venosaur) gains a double weakness to Ice
Blastoise gains a double weakness to Fighting
Zangoose gains a double weakness to Fighting
Mewtwo gains a double weakness to Bug
Lugia gains a double weakness to Electric (admittedly, Water/Flying isn't that uncommon)
Ho-Oh gains a double weakness to Ghost
Kabutops gains a double weakness to Ground
Gyarados gains a double weakness to Fairy

And yet, somehow, Charizard gets out of this with only a double weakness to Rock. (one which it already had), and no other weaknesses.

A lot of these don't really make sense at all. Mewtwo's X Mega makes it a Fighting-type, which is supposed to be the opposite to the Dark type-why would it suddenly switch? Ho-Oh loses its Fire type, which is kind of a major deal for it. Zangoose gets nothing that would make it stronger against its rival, Seviper-actually, one of its new types would be resisted by it. Lucario loses Steel in favor of Normal, because that certainly makes sense. And how the heck is Lapras a freaking dragon?

And why would we get another extra transformation like that? We got Mega Evolution just last gen-why not build on that instead of putting another one on us? (And it's funny that seven from the list already have megas)

inally there is the "Moondial" mentioned in X/Y which is not present in Sun/Moon. So there you have it.

And this is relevant because...?

Also, does this really merit its own thread? We already have a leaks/rumors discussion and a Gen 8 thread...

 

[Esserise]

Oh no, not the moondial theories again... it was a single sentence spoken by a random NPC!

Dear OP, please provide a source when posting something like this. Otherwise we have no reason to take any of it seriously.

 

[Silktree]

So the only "credibility" this rumor has is awkward English? Okay.

 

[Envoy]

Sounds like a lot of fan wish fulfillment to me.

I'm gonna go ahead and say no. The mythology seems far too obvious for what GF usually goes for (ex: Alola's legendary pair are a lion and a bat. Because when you think Hawaii, you think lion.)

Also, these 'legendaries' sound way too much like they come from the western perspective of an unimaginative teenaged boy.

 

[TechSkylander1518]

Oh, golly, I didn't realize how silly the first "leak" was.

You will be able to crossbreed Mew and Mewtwo to hatch a Mewthree in the day care centre.

So, we have both the legendary and the method of obtaining it revealed-something that's pretty rare to see-and it happens to be breeding Pokemon that previously couldn't be bred together? How would that be explained? And why would they chose such a boring way to obtain a legendary?

Pikachu - Fairy (but it can not evolve into Raichu after this)
Lapras - dragon
Tauros - steel
Hitmonlee - dark
Muk - ghost
Kabutops - ground
Snorlax - fighting
Weavile - Physchic
Zangoose - ice
Flygon - bug
Ho-oh - flying
Lugia - water

There's the question of "why the heck would Lapras be a dragon" again. (also the hilarious typo of "Physchic"-I don't trust leakers that can't spell their own content) Some of these Pokemon, like Muk, Pikachu, and Snorlax, already got something special in the newest gen-it's pretty weird to have it happen again. (Notice how no Pokemon with a Mega Evolution got an exclusive Z-Move or an Alolan Form)

And the piece that pretty much guarantees this is fake-Ho-Oh is already a Flying type. Apparently, this user couldn't do enough research to make a believable leak...

 

[Ereshkigal]

There's the question of "why the heck would Lapras be a dragon" again.

One of the depictions of the Loch Ness Monster is a dragon.

So Lapras being a water/ice type was a surprise when first gen hit.

Given Nessie is also possibly a dinosaur and how living fossils in the Pokeverse tend to be rock types... Rock/dragon actually makes more sense for Lapras than water/ice. But, rock/dragon is a bit of an odd typing, and I think Lapras was typed more for usability than adherence to mythology.

Nor is Lapras the only odd typing for what it's based on.

 

[godiego]

short answer: lol no.

 

[Almonds]

I like the idea of Pokemon in Britain, but the ideas executed sound way too overpowered and complicated. Especially triple types. Lucario, Mewtwo, and Charizard getting the favoritism all over again? There's still unexplored type-combinations. So after triple types, there's going to be, what, quadraple types?

 

[RileyXY1]

I don't like this, not one bit. Especially the triple types.

 

[godiego]

Lucario, Mewtwo, and Charizard getting the favoritism all over again?

well that sounds like the most believable part of the leak, tbh

 

[TechSkylander1518]

One of the depictions of the Loch Ness Monster is a dragon.

So Lapras being a water/ice type was a surprise when first gen hit.

Given Nessie is also possibly a dinosaur and how living fossils in the Pokeverse tend to be rock types... Rock/dragon actually makes more sense for Lapras than water/ice.

That makes a little more sense, though I'm not really finding that many depictions of the Loch Ness monster as a dragon.

Was it really that surprising? I get that the Ice type is unexpected, but "blue Pokemon people ride on the water with is a Water type" isn't exactly the plot twist of the year. (And was the Dragon type revealed at that time? There was only one family of Pokemon with it...)

Not all Pokemon based on ancient creatures are Rock types-the Bulbasaur and Chikorita lines, for example.

 

[Ereshkigal]

The part that makes me really doubt this: We already have a pokemon based on Nessie: Lapras. And while Gamefreak does sometimes revisit animal types (take a look at how many cat pokemon there are), they don't do the same exact base more than once.

And St. George's dragon is just a regular Western-style fire-breathing dragon, which is represented by Charizard.

And the more I read and think about this, the more it just seems like this person doesn't even know Pokemon, let alone how a Japanese game designer thinks.

That makes a little more sense, though I'm not really finding that many depictions of the Loch Ness monster as a dragon.

Was it really that surprising? I get that the Ice type is unexpected, but "blue Pokemon people ride on the water with is a Water type" isn't exactly the plot twist of the year. (And was the Dragon type revealed at that time? There was only one family of Pokemon with it...)

Not all Pokemon based on ancient creatures are Rock types-the Bulbasaur and Chikorita lines, for example.

Bulbasaur really looks more like a modern onion-frog hybrid than anything ancient. And chicory is modern, so I think we can rule out Chikorita for that.

The dragon myth isn't modern. It got buried when dinosaurs became popular.

In any case, it was a surprise, since the typing is not what was expected. But, then, Charizard was also a surprise; that was quite clearly a dragon, yet not dragon-typed.

 

[TechSkylander1518]

Bulbasaur really looks more like a modern onion-frog hybrid than anything ancient. And chicory is modern, so I think we can rule out Chikorita for that.

The dragon myth isn't modern. It got buried when dinosaurs became popular.

In any case, it was a surprise, since the typing is not what was expected. But, then, Charizard was also a surprise; that was quite clearly a dragon, yet not dragon-typed.

Pokemon often have more than one concept incorporated into their design. While the Chikorita line is based on the chicory plant, they also clearly take inspiration from Sauropods. And the Bulbasaur line has a strong resemblance to Dicynodonts. (also, what qualifies as "modern" to you? The wikipedia article for chicory plants states that they're one of the earliest plants mentioned in recorded literature, having been mentioned by a man who lived from 65-8 BC)

I never said that the mythology of dragons was a modern invention. I asked if the inclusion of a Dragon type was confirmed at the time. Games don't always include a dragon element, so it doesn't make sense for people to assume "Oh, that Pokemon must be a Dragon type!" if they weren't told a Dragon type existed in the first place.

And I still don't understand how someone could look at a blue, wave-surfing Pokemon and be shocked that it was a Water type.

 

[Ereshkigal]

Pokemon often have more than one concept incorporated into their design. While the Chikorita line is based on the chicory plant, they also clearly take inspiration from Sauropods. And the Bulbasaur line has a strong resemblance to Dicynodonts. (also, what qualifies as "modern" to you? The wikipedia article for chicory plants states that they're one of the earliest plants mentioned in recorded literature, having been mentioned by a man who lived from 65-8 BC)

I never said that the mythology of dragons was a modern invention. I asked if the inclusion of a Dragon type was confirmed at the time. Games don't always include a dragon element, so it doesn't make sense for people to assume "Oh, that Pokemon must be a Dragon type!" if they weren't told a Dragon type existed in the first place.

And I still don't understand how someone could look at a blue, wave-surfing Pokemon and be shocked that it was a Water type.

Dragons also clearly take inspiration from sauropods. That does not make dragons sauropods. And modern chicory tends to grow on long stems, so a long-necked Pokemon makes some sense for being based on chicory. And to me, the Bulbasaur looks closer to a toad than a Dicynodont. And for modern, I'm relying on geological time.

Dratini is a blue pokemon from Gen 1 that is known for being found in the water, can surf waves (it's one of the Pokemon that can learn Surf and has been noted for being found in water since Gen 1), and has been a pure dragon type since Gen 1.

So the fact they were willing to do one blue Pokemon with a strong water connection as a dragon type really suggested they had other reasons than color and environment connection for another.

Edit: Removed part of a sentence that sounded snarky and wasn't intended that way. Hoofenmouth is flaring up.

 

[Stratelier]

...if they weren't told a Dragon type existed in the first place.

Gen 1 was the only generation to include a type-matchup chart in its manual. And while I haven't looked at it in ages, I remember it being almost 100% accurate to gameplay (glitches and all).

 

[TechSkylander1518]

Dragons also clearly take inspiration from sauropods. That does not make dragons sauropods. And to me, the Bulbasaur looks closer to a toad than a Dicynodont. And for modern, I'm relying on geological time... as anyone should be when discussing fossils.

Dratini is a blue pokemon from Gen 1 that is known for being found in the water, can surf waves (it's one of the Pokemon that can learn Surf and has been noted for being found in water since Gen 1), and has been a pure dragon type since Gen 1.

So the fact they were willing to do one blue Pokemon with a strong water connection as a dragon type really suggested they had other reasons than color and environment connection for another.

The argument was never that these Pokemon are this species, just that they take inspiration from it. (Just like Lapras isn't a complete representation of the Loch Ness monster, or how the Pikachu line aren't exactly like mice) My apologies for misinterpreting you with time.

Was Dratini revealed before Lapras? If that's the case, I can see the reasoning behind this, but it seems like it'd be quite a stretch if it wasn't. And while Dratini does have a connection to water, it's not quite as shown off as Lapras's-its dex entries talk about it moving people across water, and that's shown quite often in the anime. (It gets quite the treatment with Surf, too-it was the Gen 2 sprite for surf, got a custom sprite for Surf in Gen 6, and the Poke Ride function for it in Gen 7-but, of course, that information wasn't there for Gen 1.)

Gen 1 was the only generation to include a type-matchup chart in its manual. And while I haven't looked at it in ages, I remember it being almost 100% accurate to gameplay (glitches and all).

At that point, the game in its entirety would have been released as well, so Lapras's type would have already been revealed.

 

[SUP3RN0VA]

While I do like the idea of a region with 4 legendary Pokémon that represents the elements (reminds me of Avatar), there is no reason to take this seriously yet. No current credible sources or anything.