• A new LGBTQ+ forum is now being trialed and there have been changes made to the Support and Advice forum. To read more about these updates, click here.
  • Hey Trainers! Be sure to check out Corsola Beach, our newest section on the forums, in partnership with our friends at Corsola Cove! At the Beach, you can discuss the competitive side of the games, post your favorite Pokemon memes, and connect with other Pokemon creators!
  • Due to the recent changes with Twitter's API, it is no longer possible for Bulbagarden forum users to login via their Twitter account. If you signed up to Bulbagarden via Twitter and do not have another way to login, please contact us here with your Twitter username so that we can get you sorted.

Official Pre-Pokémon Sword & Pokémon Shield Speculation & Leaks thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
The 2019 game will be the people who played LGPE's introduction to abilities. Anything that suggests a change or upgrade to them should be deemed fake.

The idea of gyms as Colosseums sounds very cool. I think that making gyms/trials' sites bigger and more important is a good way to make them stand out, and the way it's described sounds like Battle Frontier finally coming back without the staff worrying about "there being too much postgame".
 
I honestly doubt that people easily predicted aItctual new Pokemon/UBs and Rainbow Rocket back when USUM were first announced.
The reason why I say that is because there were fake leaks that got nothing right that still predicted new Pokemon and new UBs. (The second one even goes so far as to describe a new Ultra Beast as a "purple iron wasp (Steel/Poison)", which would be impressive if not for all the other obviously fake info in it.)
While there was fake stuff, that doesn't make the whole thing fake.
It doesn't make the whole thing reliable, either. But it does mean that the poster is either unable to tell real information from fake, or they're receiving real information but are choosing to include fake info as well.
The two (or maybe just the latest one) LGPE leaks have fake stuff, and part of the leak turned out to be legit.
Which leak are you referring to?
There was also a SM leak on 4chan back then that also revealed the fact that we're getting evolving Legendaries (Cosmog) and Lusamine's goal about the UBs + the fact they're Pokemon.
Could you link that? The only one I'm finding like that now is the Lurantis leaks, which did have images.
Are you sure? What's labelled as the "USUM Wishlist" leak in the old thread got basically everything right, except for new Alola Forms (kek), the removal of the Poké Finder, and whatever the bit about Hau getting better clothes was. And sure, some of the stuff is "easy to guess" in a vacuum, but concentrated in one shot like that? I'm willing to say they knew what was up.
Eh, I don't think being put all in one shot gives it that much more credibility. A fair amount of it is just continuing things done in past games-Giratina, Kyurem, and Zygarde all got new forms, ORAS added new Megas, and every third version was on the same console as its sister games-and being able to recognize multiple patterns isn't very impressive IMO. And there's another glaring mistake in addition to their misses-their claim about the Switch. We've got LGPE and Pig coming out well before their 3 year window. The fact that they seem to have no idea about a game being developed at the same time as USUM seems to put a dent in their credibility.
While I'm here, the original Chinese leak was "text only," though obviously that was a bit of a special case because Smogon verified the source or something before posting didn't they? Same for PokéBeach's XY leak.
Sorry, I think I wasn't being quite clear earlier. It's not that I think any text-only leak is going to be fake, just text posted totally anonymously.
the fact that it got two non-obvious, unprecedented things (the time difference between versions and the existence of old forms for new Pokémon) is, to me, reasonably impressive
It's kinda funny to me that you say that, because I'd personally consider guessing Gumshoos and Lycanroc more impressive than the time difference. (Making a game named after the moon take place at night seems more obvious than figuring out the direction Rockruff was headed in)


In any case, I should probably change my stance from "no text-based anon 4Chan leak is ever true" to "no text-based anon 4Chan leak is ever wholly true"-even with all the false info in the J15 leak, it's clear they were getting correct info from somewhere. But I think that's still a reasonable stance to have, since the "got some things right" leaks still end up having about half of their posts turn out to be fake.
 
I really hope that the Colosseums can be rechallenged in the post game if true. Can be a way to train and earn some money.
Yes, we need easily accessible repeated battles back! I always loved that about the Nimbasa Stadiums, it's just a fun way to kill some time, I wish they can bring something like that back.
 
I have read the leak again and i cannot find a difference between Gyms and the Colosseum (The format is the same, so whats the point). However, they can put a Colosseum post-game and include a lot of different battle formats (1v1, 2v2, double battle, triple battle, sky battle, 3v3,4v4,5v5,6v6, they can possibly also do Z-Move only and Mega Only, assuming they return).
 
I have read the leak again and i cannot find a difference between Gyms and the Colosseum (The format is the same, so whats the point). However, they can put a Colosseum post-game and include a lot of different battle formats (1v1, 2v2, double battle, triple battle, sky battle, 3v3,4v4,5v5,6v6, they can possibly also do Z-Move only and Mega Only, assuming they return).
I think that the difference is that in Gyms you battle against trainers that work in the Gym, Gym Trainers, while in Colosseums you battle against everyone who is challenging for the prize at the end.
 
Well, yeah. Pokemon is a franchise with a lot of established constants that fans can anticipate all the time. Plus, most games tend to keep old features and build on them. Saying things like "they'll bring back a feature that they used in the past two generations" and "they'll use a feature included in the newest game" is not exactly shocking.

Look at this fake post I made:

I don't have any insider info, but I can still make these claims that are pretty likely to be true. That's why people doubt safe guesses like these. (And probably also because we've never had a credible leak with safe guesses)

And as for stuff that's breaking the norm, it typically varies from person to person-I know I'm personally not at all willing to throw out the idea of platypus or dolphin Pokemon-but I think there's extremes that are perfectly reasonable things to react with "that's not going to happen". This usually happens because being extreme isn't the only reason to be doubtful-people also think the consequences won't be worth it. For example, there were a few leaks recently that discussed permanent retcons of characters and/or regions. The "that'll never happen" response came a lot, but it wasn't just "they'll never change"-the idea was that there's no reason to muddle canon and confuse fans with retcons when creating new things would still provide new content without any confusion.
Personally, I don't doubt that we will get a platypus or dolphin one day, but I have a feeling that when we do... it won't be from any legit leaks.

So what exactly makes a leak more believable?

I want to say that it's a case-by-case basis... because there's certainly a lot of things that make a leak less believable, but I can't say that there's anything besides deductive reasoning that makes one feel more believable. It all comes down to trimming off the "easily predictable" fat and looking at what's left.

If what's left is basically everything from every fan's wishlist then... toss it, because we all have that list and we'll believe it when we see it. It's not even worth getting your hopes up for just because some anon list promised it in the next game.

If what's left makes references to the theme or plot of the games... pick them apart. In this case- Romo and Team Reverse. It's a region based on Italy named Romo- okay, but why Romo? What does Romo mean? We know from past non-Japanese regions that the region's name ties in to a deeper theme and isn't just a blatant reference to the real world location it's based on. Romo sure as heck sounds like it's just a bastardization of Rome. As for Team Reverse- does anything about what they're doing sound like it makes any sense? They want to go back to a time where people took other people's pokemon- does it make sense that there would have ever been a time when that was a thing? Does it make sense that an organization would want that to be a thing when it means losing their own pokemon? Sure, a lot of the evil teams we've had have had ridiculous outlandish goals, but I don't think that they have ever been utterly pointless self-defeating ones.
 
I think that the difference is that in Gyms you battle against trainers that work in the Gym, Gym Trainers, while in Colosseums you battle against everyone who is challenging for the prize at the end.

Which really isn't a difference, since you clearly get the same end result (If you lose, you white out and then you can try again).
 
Which really isn't a difference, since you clearly get the same end result (If you lose, you white out and then you can try again).
Sure the end result may be the same. But the means of getting there is different. Challengers would have way stronger Pokemon than Gym Trainers, so it would be tougher and you have to plan even more carefully.

I do think that not all Challengers would have tough Pokemon. But I feel that these trainers would be omitted in the tournament due to having a tough tournament.
 
Sure the end result may be the same. But the means of getting there is different. Challengers would have way stronger Pokemon than Gym Trainers, so it would be tougher and you have to plan even more carefully.

I do think that not all Challengers would have tough Pokemon. But I feel that these trainers would be omitted in the tournament due to having a tough tournament.

That... sounds like a heavy assumption that challengers would have tougher pokemon when game balance and design would honestly lean towards colosseums just being gyms by another name. =/ Because what you're saying would suggest a game that has a higher set difficulty level and if this is the game that Game Freak wants Let's Go-ers to move on to then... no, I am pretty sure we aren't going to toss them from the fluffy bag of marshmallows directly into a fire.

I mean yeah, the games need a difficulty option but not an overall higher set difficulty. And if your basic difficulty is the same difficulty that we've always had then yeah- colosseums are exactly like gyms. It's just the semantics of the other trainers not working for the gym leader that's different, but it's fundamentally the same format.
 
Last edited:
That... sounds like a heavy assumption that challengers would have tougher pokemon when game balance and design would honestly lean towards colosseums just being gyms by another name. =/ Because what you're saying would suggest a game that has a higher set difficulty level and if this is the game that Game Freak wants Let's Go-ers to move on to then... no, I am pretty sure we aren't going to toss them from the fluffy bag of marshmallows directly into a fire.

I mean yeah, the games need a difficulty option but not an overall higher set difficulty. And if your basic difficulty is the same difficulty that we've always had then yeah- colosseums are exactly like gyms. It's just the semantics of the other trainers not working for the gym leader that's different, but it's fundamentally the same format.
I meant that usually challengers have tougher Pokemon. But you know how GF is. They'll make the Challengers basically Gym Trainers of a different name.

I do agree with the difficulty option. Can give the people who want a challenge that choice.
 
I meant that usually challengers have tougher Pokemon. But you know how GF is. They'll make the Challengers basically Gym Trainers of a different name.

I do agree with the difficulty option. Can give the people who want a challenge that choice.
XD We really need that difficulty option. I mean, I have no issue with the standard difficulty myself but I can totally sympathize with everybody who wants a tougher game- and they should have that option! It also has replay value, not to mention all the youtube videos people make of such challenges, which is practically free publicity to entice people to play a game, and many people can be tempted into playing just for the bragging rights... difficulty options are just a good idea in general.
 
if this is the game that Game Freak wants Let's Go-ers to move on to then... no, I am pretty sure we aren't going to toss them from the fluffy bag of marshmallows directly into a fire.
I'm kinda confused by arguments like this, because I thought Pig was stated to be more for long-term fans rather than Goers?
 
I'm kinda confused by arguments like this, because I thought Pig was stated to be more for long-term fans rather than Goers?
I figure it is for long-term fans, but I doubt that means that they're going to make the game's baseline more difficult or throw in a ton of confusing new mechanics that would turn off any newcomers- ultimately, they are going to want Let's Go to act as an introduction to the main series for Go-players and young kids so they can get them to buy their other games. Which means that the main series games should not be made significantly more difficult. It's a matter of keeping the games accessible. The game's base mode should not be amped up anyway, because not everyone wants a more difficult game. A difficult mode should absolutely be implemented, but the basic challenge level should really be left as is.

If it really is for long-term fans, that should mean none of the Go-inspired mechanics (which I believe was already confirmed at some point?), and hopefully less hand-holding. Preferably an option to skip tutorials because we all know how to catch a pokemon by now- but I'm kinda betting that this won't be a long-term fan's dream game and more just the traditional pokemon game without all of the Go influence. Fingers crossed for difficulty modes and tutorial skipping, though, because it would be about time.
 
Does it make sense that an organization would want that to be a thing when it means losing their own pokemon? Sure, a lot of the evil teams we've had have had ridiculous outlandish goals, but I don't think that they have ever been utterly pointless self-defeating ones.
Team Plasma sought to completely seperate Pokémon from human ownership, yet used Pokémon themselves to achieve such a goal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom