• Hey guys! Have you heard? We now have popup
    Yes, Popups!
    messages for your forum posts. Learn more about it here!
  • To keep up with the hype driven by Sword and Shield's release, we are taking applications for new moderators in our Current Events: Sword and Shield as well as Anime and Manga sections.

    For more information, see this thread.We hope you all consider joining our team!
  • We hope you're enjoying Sword and Shield so far! So that everyone can enjoy it and not be spoiled, please keep the all story spoilers and any images from the games in the appropriate sections or in spoiler tags until January 3rd.

    Since spoiler tags are not allowed in signatures, please do not put images from the games in your signature either. You can list the names of new Pokémon if you want to list your team in your signature.
  • We're launching a brand new series on the official Bulbagarden YouTube Channel! Watch here as AussieEevee attempts the Nuzlocke Challenge in HeartGold.
  • The forums' software will be updated on December 9th, 2019 and may be down for several hours to multiple days for this process. Thank you for your patience, we hope this update will improve your experience here.

    Why not join us over on discord during the downtime?

The leaked SpaceWorld demo is real

웃♥유
Joined
Jun 24, 2017
Messages
1,178
Reaction score
3,055
Someone pointed this out a few days ago, but I bet that "the powers that be" will still remain in denial and will refuse to allow an official page for the Spaceworld 1997 demo to be created on the main wiki. :cautious: Cool video though. (y)
 
Last edited:
Well-Known Member
Joined
May 27, 2018
Messages
6,059
Reaction score
8,283
Yup, that's the video I posted. I'm also wondering too why they don't allow an article on it when the leak has a lot of evidence in its favor.
 

dig

/
Joined
Jul 4, 2012
Messages
21,881
Reaction score
4,710
Someone pointed this out a few days ago, but I bet that "the powers that be" will still remain in denial and will refuse to allow an official page for the Spaceworld 1997 demo to be created on the main wiki. :cautious: Cool video though. (y)
Yup, that's the video I posted. I'm also wondering too why they don't allow an article on it when the leak has a lot of evidence in its favor.

A lot of evidence, sure, but no actual confirmation. We pride ourselves in having 100% accurate articles and entries. The Spaceworld demo, as much as I personally believe it's authentic, cannot be verified as true. Like the video, there are things that seem to add up and point to the demo being a real demo, but it could also be argued that the demo was made to replicate known beta ideas for Pokemon GS.

Bottom line, it could be fake. It's probably real, but it could be fake. Bulbapedia cannot make an article on something so questionable without calling into doubt every other article.
 
Well-Known Member
Joined
May 27, 2018
Messages
6,059
Reaction score
8,283
A lot of evidence, sure, but no actual confirmation. We pride ourselves in having 100% accurate articles and entries. The Spaceworld demo, as much as I personally believe it's authentic, cannot be verified as true. Like the video, there are things that seem to add up and point to the demo being a real demo, but it could also be argued that the demo was made to replicate known beta ideas for Pokemon GS.

Bottom line, it could be fake. It's probably real, but it could be fake. Bulbapedia cannot make an article on something so questionable without calling into doubt every other article.
Okay, but how do you fake things that were not known at the time? The green Ledyba and the Pokédex layout match the leak perfectly and there's no way someone knew about them beforehand.
 
웃♥유
Joined
Jun 24, 2017
Messages
1,178
Reaction score
3,055
I don't quite understand the 'it could also be argued that the demo was made to replicate known beta ideas for Pokemon GS' argument in this case though, because the video above is new (as in it was never posted before July 2019 afaik) and the Ledyba sprite from the leaked demo is exactly the same as the one from the above video including the color and shading; how could someone fake that sprite and get it 100% correct when the video showing that sprite hadn't been posted before July of this year?

And it seems like the only way that certain folks will be convinced that the demo is real is if a Gamefreak employee who worked on the games back in 1997 actually comes forward and confirms its authenticity, but that's almost certainly never going to happen even if the demo is real because Gamefreak's staff don't usually comment on leaks, much less talk about a leaked game demo from over 20 years ago. This is basically an endless loop now: the people in charge of the wiki won't add an official page about the Spaceworld demo until a Gamefreak employee confirms the demo's authenticity, but Gamefreak won't do such a thing. So we're stuck and have to resort to using other sites for Spaceworld information.
 
Member
Joined
May 21, 2019
Messages
98
Reaction score
252
I've been following the drama surrounding this demo thing ever since it was leaked over a year ago and the mental gymnastics that I've seen used to deny its genuineness have been staggering. I'm almost expecting someone to come in here and claim that the video is an elaborate hoax too lol.

But seriously, couldn't someone just make a page for the demo on the wiki and add a warning that the material covered isn't 100 percent confirmed? That way even if the demo turns out to be a fake, the wiki won't be held responsible for spreading false information and the wiki can keep its reputation clean which is apparently the only thing that matters.
 
Nepgear is cute.
Joined
Jun 9, 2014
Messages
1,830
Reaction score
2,378
A lot of evidence, sure, but no actual confirmation. We pride ourselves in having 100% accurate articles and entries. The Spaceworld demo, as much as I personally believe it's authentic, cannot be verified as true. Like the video, there are things that seem to add up and point to the demo being a real demo, but it could also be argued that the demo was made to replicate known beta ideas for Pokemon GS.

Bottom line, it could be fake. It's probably real, but it could be fake. Bulbapedia cannot make an article on something so questionable without calling into doubt every other article.
You don’t have to claim it’s the real deal though. Last I checked, Bulbapedia has an article on the PokéGod playground rumor phenomenon, all of which people believed to be real back in the old days back when Red and Blue were in the United States. While these rumors were ultimately nothing but playground rumors, it was still widespread enough amongst the fandom’s history to have an article dedicated to it. If we have an article about widespread rumors, then I’m not sure why the Spaceworld demo is such a problem.

Just to be on the safe side, I recommend opening the article with a statement similar to this:

“On May 26th, 2018, there was a ROM released to the public that many believe to be the lost Pokémon Gold Spaceworld 97 demo. While the the demo lines up with certain amounts of known information about Gold and Silver’s development period, its authenticity is questionable. Detailed below are pieces of information present with the demo’s files.”

This would allow users to access the information on your website without having to claim liability for its authenticity. If nothing else, it’s a big event in the Pokémon fandom’s history that deserves to be documented in the same manner as the PokéGod phenomenon.

That’s just my opinion though; I can’t force you to do anything with the Spaceworld demo. All I can do is offer advice and wait to see what happens.
 
Something
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
11,584
Reaction score
562
A lot of evidence, sure, but no actual confirmation. We pride ourselves in having 100% accurate articles and entries. The Spaceworld demo, as much as I personally believe it's authentic, cannot be verified as true. Like the video, there are things that seem to add up and point to the demo being a real demo, but it could also be argued that the demo was made to replicate known beta ideas for Pokemon GS.

Bottom line, it could be fake. It's probably real, but it could be fake. Bulbapedia cannot make an article on something so questionable without calling into doubt every other article.
This Bulbapedia staff member seems to imply that they intend on making an article:

FWIW, I think one of the biggest controversies is the whole hullabaloo on Green/Leaf's talk page that's been going on for several years.

Space World is a sensitive subject matter especially when it comes to legality and stuff, like yes we have (improperly named) beta articles but for the most part that's information that could be gleaned from the final games code and prerelease material. Hosting information on a completely unseen and unreleased version of the game is a different matter. I don't believe there is any doubt that it is really left in the staff though I may be mistaken. What I can say is I highly doubt the information we put up would be as exhaustive as that found on The Cutting Room Floor (which I'd barely call a no-name site, I'd argue it's fairly well known and specifically caters to this sort of stuff).

As for the other language wiki, I presume you're talking about Pokewiki who have done what I believe is a fantastic job. When Bulbapedia's page is made I'd like it to be seen based off that, it's clear, concise and not overly laden with wholely irrelevant too specific information. However, we don't quite have a page in userspace up to that standard yet. I've personally started work on it in my user page as has other users, but personally, I have much more stuff to focus on Bulbapedia wise (as well as real-life) then the Space World demo.
 
Top