Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
If the last picture was from the same guy as the first one then, the whole leak is likely to be fake... AGAIN.
Setting up your straw-men, as always. However...
All discourse pertaining to playable character predictions should be within the SSB4 Character Discussion threads, not this one.
Good but maybe Dixie for K. Rool and/or Mewtwo for Lucas.
People did this pretty fast, I'm not well versed in photoshop but I would imagine you could change the angles around
In this thread, there were 75 minutes of gap which is more possible.
Plus, we don't know the time the originals were even taken. Quite some time went by before I even brought the first two here, and even more likely from the time it took Gamefaqs to get it from 4chan. That's ample time to work something up.
I think people are crazy for thinking that Dixie Kong could make a more interesting inclusion than Cranky XP
I was considering him too but in reality I just don't see it happening.
Me too and that's just for the IP thing. I'm going to act like this leak never existed until proven true. However, given how this thread is going fast, it can change in one post so I don't know now.
Isn't the Palutena leak still valid though?
I find this sort of thinking to be flawed, actually. True, there may not be much about this leak that proves it's fake. But that could easily be a design choice done by the leak's creator. For example, if the leak had a picture of a unconfirmed newcomer that looks real and can't be proven to be fake, that would give this leak a strong case. However, with this particular leak, all we have are some of the confirmed characters arranged in a roster format. People make fanmade rosters all the time, some of which are designed to resemble an actual roster layout. I see nothing to indicate that this is anything more than that.
I think that it's Gematsu leak+Ridley+Mewtwo/K. Rool
tl;dr version: Assumes both Gematsu leaks are true, only cuts are Ivy/Squirt and Snake, Mewtwo returns, and last roster spot goes to Ridley (could be swapped with K. Rool I guess, I expect one or the other, but I think both is a bit too optimistic.)
I'm sure I'd be in the minority, but if this were the final roster, I'd be quite pleased. Maybe it's because of Ridley and the return of Mewtwo that cancels out all the boringness of Chrom, and me not minding Mii that much anymore (who doesn't want to throw banana peels at Sakurai?) and not minding the Chorus Men at all.
The difference is that all other leaks, regardless of how safe they are trying to be, always have some sort of indication that they're not legit.
K. Rool for Lucas and I'm cool with it.
tl;dr version: Assumes both Gematsu leaks are true, only cuts are Ivy/Squirt and Snake, Mewtwo returns, and last roster spot goes to Ridley (could be swapped with K. Rool I guess, I expect one or the other, but I think both is a bit too optimistic.)
I'm sure I'd be in the minority, but if this were the final roster, I'd be quite pleased. Maybe it's because of Ridley and the return of Mewtwo that cancels out all the boringness of Chrom, and me not minding Mii that much anymore (who doesn't want to throw banana peels at Sakurai?) and not minding the Chorus Men at all. And hey, Chrom would make a nice punching bag simply for not being Robin.
I still don't think that's nearly enough to assume it's true. There's a significant difference between showing us a never-before-seen model of a potential newcomer that has no obvious flaws (like with Palutena), and arranging pictures of characters onto a screen and adding in some basic 2D shapes to make a roster. And this is just me, but I don't even think the roster looks that good; it's kind of bland. This kind of thing would be very easy to fake. And with nothing substantial to suggest it's real, I strongly believe it to be fake.
I read you saying something like this about 30 pages ago, I don't think we should use something that is evidence that it is false as evidence that it is real.
You mean Ghirahim, right? :D
If it's a late leak, it's been probably debunked.
You know what else was bland? Brawl's character select screen.
This was posted in numerous other threads, and it has been confirmed to be super fake.
I think the IP thing is the one major thing that hasn't really been settled. If anyone that is lurking on this thread can confirm whether or not the 6th pic truly originated from the same IP address as the original 2 pics, please post and let us know.
Well, I didn't took any pictures and I didn't even know where the ip was displayed.
I've been looking at the screenshots and doing a bit of research based on what I know about graphic design and photography. Here are my findings.
The most telling image is this one:
If we look at the, we can see some pixelation. Somebody who's decent at creating hoaxes knows that some screen aliasing, or "moire" as it's sometimes called, makes for a convincing image, as does pixelation when up close.
The nice thing about anti-aliasing on raster images is that it's easy to count to columns of pixels to deduce facts about the image. In this case, I found that the circle portion of the metroid icon is 17px in diameter, and the circle surrounding the franchise icon is 34-35px (give or take)
One thing I know about producing graphics for video games is that most graphics are raster (made of pixels). When you design for a specific device with a specific resolution, you create menu art so that the pixels of the art match perfectly with the pixels of the screen, so that no resampling is taking place, and you get as sharp an image as possible.
Knowing that this game is in 720p or 1080p, we can deduce whether or not this dimension makes sense in the context of a resolution that large. Below is an image with a reproduced metroid icon using the dimensions stipulated in the above image.
Compositing the other screenshots to match the size of the pixel-perfect metroid icon, we can see that even with some margin of error, the supposed character select screen doesn't fill a 720p resolution, and doesn't even come close to filling a 1080p resolution.
The only way the icon could be that small and still have the content fill the screen is if the graphic of the metroid icon is being UPscaled for the menu, and that would be a terribly sloppy thing coming from a seasoned video game developer. It's one thing to upscale rendered 3D models, but it's another thing to create art for a menu that has to be upscaled. There's no reason for that.
Furthermore, when you take a picture that's close enough to the screen that you can see pixels, you SHOULD see some sub-pixel separation (the red green and blue elements of a pixel have a slight gap between them that is typically indiscernible at a distance, but very apparent up close.
Not only that, but with most camera lenses, taking a picture that close and at that angle would result in some blurriness somewhere in the image, because the depth of field can't possibly be that large. Plus, content that is that far off center in the shot is NEVER auto-focused on, so why the heck is that metroid icon that sharp in the first place? We shouldn't be able to see pixelation that easily without some blurriness.
AND EVEN STILL, what kinda screen are we looking at that the colors don't distort at such a sharp angle? Is the guy using a magic camera??
I took the liberty of taking a photo of that metroid icon at actual resolution (pixels of the image match the pixels of the screen) at a similar angle with some elements around it to replicate the context. here's what it looks like:
I used my iPhone to take the photo. I also took some photos with my DSLR, but I couldn't even get the dang thing in focus being that close to the subject. What are the chances the guy had a macro lens with him? Pretty slim.
This is a photo of an IPS panel, which has very good color fidelity at sharp angles, and even this screen doesn't keep colors as well in a photo. You have to stage a photograph REALLY well to keep screen artifacts to a minimum, and what are the chances a photographer got the chance to do that? As you can see, the subpixel separations are very apparent, which is not the case in the "leak."
Also.... the perspective of these images doesn't really make that much sense, which is what happens when you use a free transform in Photoshop to produce the perspective. Photoshop distortion isn't the same as camera lens distortion, which produces fisheye. There is little to no fisheye on these images, and the only way that would come from a camera is if the photographer zoomed in from a distance, rather than taking the picture up close. What are the chances of the images being this crisp and clear under those circumstances??
Hopefully if you weren't sure before, you can be sure now. These images just SCREAM "fake." I give the guy props for thinking of putting the moire and trying to use the multiple angles thing to pass it off as real, but he can't fool me.
Fake as fake can be.
I asked on Gfaqs, but could you post an example from Brawl of this happening, side by side to what occurs with Ridley's portrait?Not sure if this has been thoroughly discussed, but in Brawl, when you hover over a character icon, it pops out, raising it several pixels
This was going around which shows that the Ridley pixels thing is invalid. Im still skeptical myself about it being real, but test out Brawl and you will see the boxes raise pixels when you hover over them.
So can officially decredit the Ridley portion when trying to debunk this. What do you'll think?
In regards to Ridley's Icon being blue or not:
![]()
Just compared, the icon is definitely not same color grey as the unselected smash logo.
Arne83 from Gamefaqs has been kind enough to increase the saturation to show the image is infact blue.
![]()
While light, it is blue in tone.
I feel we are turning this into The Greninja Leak part 2, where we are using pixels to try debunk something, when in the end its all insignificant.
I would prefer a before/after or short recording.
'd