This is exactly what was going through my mind when it happened, and it frustrates me a bit to see so many people leap at it like vultures, with zero shame while spreading the scraps with no sense of respect or regard of context...
The most interesting part of this leak to me, a supposed transcript of the meeting reflecting on B&W's reception and the plans for B&W2 / X&Y, turned out to be fake. I think that's meaningful. "In such a system, the appeal is not in understanding the text on its own terms but in unearthing the facts beneath it" ... that's a really potent quote when you then consider the role that the standard for "fact" is not particularly high. I've found this whole discourse cycle to be an exercise in futility (in part because I'm so disenchanted with the Pokémon series) because I'm not even sure how to parse this volume of information. What am I supposed to take from it? How does any of this deepen my understanding of Pokémon? I think it's somewhat interesting to sift through all this stuff that pops up on my timeline, but there's seemingly little effort to make any coherent narrative come into view.
You're making me think about the (in my opinion obnoxious) reverence that fans have for canon and lore even in the face of seeming apathy from its creators, see the Zelda timeline. I think fandom behavior isn't actually always about going on a search and destroy mission for authorial intent - it's oftentimes about clocking a perceived error in the author's vision, and then complaining loudly about it. See, again, reactions to the latest revision of the Zelda timeline. So much panicked value is placed on trying to organize fiction into systems of meaning that *don't need to exist* for us to find artistry and value in our favorite universes. I am lore's number one enemy.
I AM LORE'S NUMBER ONE ENEMY 😂😂 I have been cooking a take for a bit now that lore is the enemy of storytelling. Still thinking about it.
Thank you for this thoughtful comment. I was also drawn to that leaked convo about B&W's reception and felt so exasperated when it turned out to be fake.
It's just crazy to me how much discourse and content exists to serve no meaningful end or conclusion. For example, I constantly see speculation and debate over which region the developers will use as inspiration for the next set of Pokemon games, but I never find that data to be very meaningful in any context. What does knowing Scarlet and Violet were inspired by Spain actually, materially, tell us about those games? It all feels like post-hoc nonsense for the sake of building reputation and authority. I wonder sometimes if we are even talking about games or if the cottage industry itself has evolved to represent something else entirely
This time the information really is too overwhelming to grab. Like I don't even know about the fake news regarding Gen 5's reception either mentioned in another comment. I'm considering how to respond to you properly.
I know even in the Pokemon community, there are still many people who dislike leaks, but sometimes I feel some of their statements might be a bit...self-righteous? Your concerns are normal, as are the frustrations some people feel, primarily stemming from the injustice of the situation and the fact that the hackers didn't even hide sensitive personal information. That's what I assumed.
Regarding the use of this information, I think your view is a bit too generalized. I believe there're some contents out there that triggered you. However, for example, the Hidden Power Podcast discusses this as well, which is part of their job, and they rationally urge people to remain skeptical. In another episode, you can see Dusty was arguing a similar concept of system or categories that can be changed. Soul and Lumi told him there are rules instead. Think about it.
The "fact" that GF uses sprites to start designs and still spends time writing a lot of grotesque backgrounds in an era when this IP should have been solidified has occupied most of my thoughts. While this viewpoint relates to the deeper discussions you mentioned, unfortunately, I don't think the documents provide answers at this time. Our approach to exploring information、"fact" is one thing, but to me, the facts I care about haven't really emerged. I don't think this matter is much different from our usual speculations、blame or defense about GF.
Now, a bit of personal perspective. You could say this is my biggest obsession with Pokemon. I believe many things in this world are "blurred" for both legitimate and illegitimate reasons. People often say like speculating is more fun、vague things are beautiful、open for people do explain individually. But I don't think the pharse "real treasure was the friends we made along the way" can always work. "Facts" are precious! Especially considering GF's tendency to conceal most information to the point of almost nonexistence. Sure you can compare Pokemon to a massive piece of art. As a fakemon designer myself, I believe that adhering to certain rules brings me closer to understanding it. When fans say my work resembles official designs, it’s the highest praise to me. I don't think this restricts my creativity, or I simply apply my creativity elsewhere.
I think it would benefit you in the future to write your feedback about what you feel and what I wrote without projecting strange, emotional feelings onto me.
"Your concerns are normal," is an odd thing to say because I am not looking for your approval. Claiming that I got "triggered" by something related to Pokemon is also pretty sharp language for a claim that I don't think you can back up at all based, again, on what I wrote.
Here's a quote from the essay I think might be worth revisiting
"There is value in understanding the ideas left behind in drafts and discarded Pokémon designs, much like how an archaeologist might unearth lost artifacts. The leaked data contains the DNA of creativity, the fingerprints of artists shaping worlds. It deserves to be looked at with care, with the intention to understand—not just to exploit."
Finally, I think a difference of opinion has emerged between you and I. When I am talking about the difference between what's fact and what's not, I am not discerning what's real and what's fake. I am not talking about information that is "confirmed," vs information that turns out to be fan-created farse. I am talking about the experience of fiction. If you tell me "Southern Kalos was real!!" That fact alone doesn't function within storytelling. That fact alone doesn't change my impression of the game I actually played. It's not real. It's functionally the same as if we found out "Professor Oak was actually a serial killer the entire time." It's meaningless because it doesn't exist in a way that communicates meaning to an audience—it's just one of many discarded drafts. You see this now, even. You see people say that some of the uncovered lore documents are unimportant and not worth examining whereas other, equally legitimate scraps, are deemed revelatory. This is not the work of journalists, archaeologists, or artists—this is a practice employed by super fans for the exact purpose I describe in this piece.
I know maybe my feedback wasn't structured in the best way. The reason I said your concerns are normal is because usually when these big things happen, some poeple will state such worries over the entire community. I'm saying this to show my supportive side for your views even if you don't need it. But I said this first so I can start something not on your side.
Maybe triggered isn't a good word choice, but you're sharing this definitely because you saw what some in the community did. If anything that's what I meant, and I don't want to be blamed for no reason, that's why I came here to share.
I know responding to this view won't be easy but finally I decided to mainly talk my point of view.
Actually~after seeing your examples, I understand more about your point and I agree. I never fall through the examples you gave. I too~won't say I can't look at Typholosion in the same way. I hope it's the right metaphor. But if you're discussing about this I won't bother to come here.
It's because to me I saw a similar idea for the artwork part I concern. The very reason I came here was because this paragraph:
I am discovering that there's something unsettling to me personally when it feels like experiencing art is about finding definitive answers rather than the journey of exploration.
Even if your elaboration wasn't really the thing I was saying, this paragraph still hit me.
So~I guess that's why we don't connect and the conversations seem irrelevant. I'm Sorry about that part.
This is a really good essay that is exactly what I've been thinking but haven't been able to articulate.
Thank you,
This is exactly what was going through my mind when it happened, and it frustrates me a bit to see so many people leap at it like vultures, with zero shame while spreading the scraps with no sense of respect or regard of context...
The most interesting part of this leak to me, a supposed transcript of the meeting reflecting on B&W's reception and the plans for B&W2 / X&Y, turned out to be fake. I think that's meaningful. "In such a system, the appeal is not in understanding the text on its own terms but in unearthing the facts beneath it" ... that's a really potent quote when you then consider the role that the standard for "fact" is not particularly high. I've found this whole discourse cycle to be an exercise in futility (in part because I'm so disenchanted with the Pokémon series) because I'm not even sure how to parse this volume of information. What am I supposed to take from it? How does any of this deepen my understanding of Pokémon? I think it's somewhat interesting to sift through all this stuff that pops up on my timeline, but there's seemingly little effort to make any coherent narrative come into view.
You're making me think about the (in my opinion obnoxious) reverence that fans have for canon and lore even in the face of seeming apathy from its creators, see the Zelda timeline. I think fandom behavior isn't actually always about going on a search and destroy mission for authorial intent - it's oftentimes about clocking a perceived error in the author's vision, and then complaining loudly about it. See, again, reactions to the latest revision of the Zelda timeline. So much panicked value is placed on trying to organize fiction into systems of meaning that *don't need to exist* for us to find artistry and value in our favorite universes. I am lore's number one enemy.
I AM LORE'S NUMBER ONE ENEMY 😂😂 I have been cooking a take for a bit now that lore is the enemy of storytelling. Still thinking about it.
Thank you for this thoughtful comment. I was also drawn to that leaked convo about B&W's reception and felt so exasperated when it turned out to be fake.
It's just crazy to me how much discourse and content exists to serve no meaningful end or conclusion. For example, I constantly see speculation and debate over which region the developers will use as inspiration for the next set of Pokemon games, but I never find that data to be very meaningful in any context. What does knowing Scarlet and Violet were inspired by Spain actually, materially, tell us about those games? It all feels like post-hoc nonsense for the sake of building reputation and authority. I wonder sometimes if we are even talking about games or if the cottage industry itself has evolved to represent something else entirely
Hello~Jake:
This time the information really is too overwhelming to grab. Like I don't even know about the fake news regarding Gen 5's reception either mentioned in another comment. I'm considering how to respond to you properly.
I know even in the Pokemon community, there are still many people who dislike leaks, but sometimes I feel some of their statements might be a bit...self-righteous? Your concerns are normal, as are the frustrations some people feel, primarily stemming from the injustice of the situation and the fact that the hackers didn't even hide sensitive personal information. That's what I assumed.
Regarding the use of this information, I think your view is a bit too generalized. I believe there're some contents out there that triggered you. However, for example, the Hidden Power Podcast discusses this as well, which is part of their job, and they rationally urge people to remain skeptical. In another episode, you can see Dusty was arguing a similar concept of system or categories that can be changed. Soul and Lumi told him there are rules instead. Think about it.
The "fact" that GF uses sprites to start designs and still spends time writing a lot of grotesque backgrounds in an era when this IP should have been solidified has occupied most of my thoughts. While this viewpoint relates to the deeper discussions you mentioned, unfortunately, I don't think the documents provide answers at this time. Our approach to exploring information、"fact" is one thing, but to me, the facts I care about haven't really emerged. I don't think this matter is much different from our usual speculations、blame or defense about GF.
Now, a bit of personal perspective. You could say this is my biggest obsession with Pokemon. I believe many things in this world are "blurred" for both legitimate and illegitimate reasons. People often say like speculating is more fun、vague things are beautiful、open for people do explain individually. But I don't think the pharse "real treasure was the friends we made along the way" can always work. "Facts" are precious! Especially considering GF's tendency to conceal most information to the point of almost nonexistence. Sure you can compare Pokemon to a massive piece of art. As a fakemon designer myself, I believe that adhering to certain rules brings me closer to understanding it. When fans say my work resembles official designs, it’s the highest praise to me. I don't think this restricts my creativity, or I simply apply my creativity elsewhere.
I think it would benefit you in the future to write your feedback about what you feel and what I wrote without projecting strange, emotional feelings onto me.
"Your concerns are normal," is an odd thing to say because I am not looking for your approval. Claiming that I got "triggered" by something related to Pokemon is also pretty sharp language for a claim that I don't think you can back up at all based, again, on what I wrote.
Here's a quote from the essay I think might be worth revisiting
"There is value in understanding the ideas left behind in drafts and discarded Pokémon designs, much like how an archaeologist might unearth lost artifacts. The leaked data contains the DNA of creativity, the fingerprints of artists shaping worlds. It deserves to be looked at with care, with the intention to understand—not just to exploit."
Finally, I think a difference of opinion has emerged between you and I. When I am talking about the difference between what's fact and what's not, I am not discerning what's real and what's fake. I am not talking about information that is "confirmed," vs information that turns out to be fan-created farse. I am talking about the experience of fiction. If you tell me "Southern Kalos was real!!" That fact alone doesn't function within storytelling. That fact alone doesn't change my impression of the game I actually played. It's not real. It's functionally the same as if we found out "Professor Oak was actually a serial killer the entire time." It's meaningless because it doesn't exist in a way that communicates meaning to an audience—it's just one of many discarded drafts. You see this now, even. You see people say that some of the uncovered lore documents are unimportant and not worth examining whereas other, equally legitimate scraps, are deemed revelatory. This is not the work of journalists, archaeologists, or artists—this is a practice employed by super fans for the exact purpose I describe in this piece.
I know maybe my feedback wasn't structured in the best way. The reason I said your concerns are normal is because usually when these big things happen, some poeple will state such worries over the entire community. I'm saying this to show my supportive side for your views even if you don't need it. But I said this first so I can start something not on your side.
Maybe triggered isn't a good word choice, but you're sharing this definitely because you saw what some in the community did. If anything that's what I meant, and I don't want to be blamed for no reason, that's why I came here to share.
I know responding to this view won't be easy but finally I decided to mainly talk my point of view.
Actually~after seeing your examples, I understand more about your point and I agree. I never fall through the examples you gave. I too~won't say I can't look at Typholosion in the same way. I hope it's the right metaphor. But if you're discussing about this I won't bother to come here.
It's because to me I saw a similar idea for the artwork part I concern. The very reason I came here was because this paragraph:
I am discovering that there's something unsettling to me personally when it feels like experiencing art is about finding definitive answers rather than the journey of exploration.
Even if your elaboration wasn't really the thing I was saying, this paragraph still hit me.
So~I guess that's why we don't connect and the conversations seem irrelevant. I'm Sorry about that part.