Timeline for Why is this "unreleased content", when it actually isn't?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:09 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://gaming.stackexchange.com/ with https://gaming.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 26, 2014 at 16:01 | answer | added | Grace NoteStaffMod | timeline score: 10 | |
| Mar 24, 2014 at 23:44 | comment | added | user98085 | Are you seriously trying to justify your "unreleased content" question with "It's not cheating!!"? We don't support any form of multiplayer-relevant cheating, no matter if it "could be valid". We don't allow questions on how to hack in stats, and neither do we allow hacking in pokemon. We have very few exceptions. | |
| Mar 24, 2014 at 17:33 | comment | added | childe | This is really a question of whether someone subscribes to moral legitness or to programmatic legitness: hacking an item to get an event generates a pokemon which is programmatically legit, but moralists would argue that the pokemon should never have existed. | |
| Mar 24, 2014 at 17:31 | comment | added | childe | Let me give a clearer example. Some Pokemon cannot learn specific moves. For example, a Charizard can obviously not learn Hydro Cannon, or have stats to 999. If you find a player in-game that has a Charizard with Hydro Cannon and stats to 999, yes that player hacked the Pokemon and cheated the game, because a normal player without any tools besides the game could not create that himself. However, if a player has a Pokemon that's Shiny, has perfect IV's, and perfect EVs, and got them through hacked Pokemon, that's no different than a user who spent the time soft-resetting for the same Pokemon. | |
| Mar 24, 2014 at 9:00 | comment | added | badp Mod | @slowpoke how is it not cheating? | |
| Mar 24, 2014 at 3:17 | comment | added | childe | What defines cheating @badp? If a player creates a Pokemon with perfect IV/EVs with the right nature and is shiny, is that cheating? | |
| Mar 24, 2014 at 1:11 | comment | added | Trent Hawkins | So, while this Wonder Card may be how Diancie was meant to be received, it may never see the light of day. We don't know yet how Nintendo will officially release this pokemon to the players. While it is there, on the cartride, we do not know the means by which we will receive it until nintendo releases it. | |
| Mar 24, 2014 at 1:08 | comment | added | Trent Hawkins | Diancie along with the other Gen6 event distribution legendaries, are all effectively free on-disk DLC. Unreleased free on-disk DLC. Despite Nintendo being Nintendo and pointlessly keeping a lid on things, the Pokemon community has known just about everything about every legendary because hackers have found ways around the otherwise gated content. Take for example the Azure Flute. Designed as the way the players were supposed to obtain Arceus, it was never released. | |
| Mar 24, 2014 at 0:10 | comment | added | Frank | Can you prove it exists in files? You use that as a justification, but have absolutely no proof to back it up whatsoever. You asked the question directly after it had been announced. You arguing that it exists was done in bad faith, in an attempt to keep your question. | |
| Mar 23, 2014 at 23:56 | comment | added | badp Mod | @Slowpoke cheating in multiplayer games is verboten here as well. | |
| Mar 23, 2014 at 23:42 | comment | added | childe | What do you mean legitimate? Do we ban users asking questions about downloading Pokemon? Some users will, instead of spending a month's time on the game just to get a fully trained EV/IV pokmeon, will spawn them in. The game recognizes it as being "legal", and as such, is their really a problem? Why do users have to live up to some lofty expectations that they shouldn't have? | |
| Mar 23, 2014 at 23:18 | comment | added | LessPop_MoreFizz Mod | @slowpoke are you ignoring the "through legitimate means" portion of how the close reason is phrased? (I.E., we generally consider mods to current consoles for this sort of thing verboten.) I don't know enough about this situation to say whether it applies, but your total failure to address it is, at least a little, telling. | |
| Mar 23, 2014 at 22:39 | comment | added | Once Upon a Dev | You might want to read one of the most recent takes on unreleased content. One of the highly upvoted comments mentions that datamining ("but the file existsssss") is a bad argument to make on a site focused on playing the games. When is a game publicly available agrees that there should be a playable version not limited to the press or employees. I have to mention I know nothing about pokemon, tho. | |
| Mar 23, 2014 at 22:35 | comment | added | childe | For example, I would understand if someone asked a question about "when is hl3 coming out" because it hasn't existed as a file at any point yet, or has no official release yet. The Pokemon however has existed within the game and there are clearly plenty of Youtubers who already have gotten the Pokemon. | |
| Mar 23, 2014 at 22:34 | comment | added | childe | If the pokemon has ALREADY existed in the game files since day one, how can you close a question on the basis of "unreleased content", since it is now sitting on almost 1,000,000 pokemon xy cartridges and counting | |
| Mar 23, 2014 at 22:31 | comment | added | Once Upon a Dev | I can't find any release date related to it, could you link to one? | |
| Mar 23, 2014 at 22:29 | history | asked | childe | CC BY-SA 3.0 |