Geno (♥♪!?): Return of the Starsend Savior

[MattX20]

Super Mario RPG had quite a few visual gags that were quite funny regarding the characters, the same kinda humor would be appreciated with Geno or the stage cameos

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Super Mario RPG had quite a few visual gags that were quite funny regarding the characters, the same kinda humor would be appreciated with Geno or the stage cameos

Honestly, they could throw in other SMRPG characters in the BG if they're not being played as. Bowser, Peach, and Mario. That or use their original 2.5D designs.

 

[NintendoKnight]

Regarding CM, it really does come down to "is it real because Nintendo/Co didn't take it down".

It's a fuzzy road considering Nintendo didn't take this down:

This was widespread and they didn't do anything about it.

Honestly, the only leak I think Nintendo directly took care of in regards to Smash Ultimate was Byleth's original VA, Christ Niosi, bragging about being chosen as the voice for Byleth in Three Houses. He mentioned something about being in Smash if Byleth makes the cut and BAM, he got replaced. I think Nintendo counted that as breaking NDA, and may have been the true reason they recast the character. Apparently it was claimed that he broke NDA by announcing that he voiced the character in Three Houses before the game launched, but that seems fishy to me.

I, however, choose to believe he broke NDA (for Smash). Because, as we all know, Byleth did make the cut and probably already had his lines recorded before then.

 

[YsDisciple]

Big ol' post ahead:

So, this is the timeline we're likely looking at given we have enough to suggest that the development team works on three characters at a time:

December 2018: Plant, Joker, Hero

February 2019: Joker, Hero, Banjo

April 2019: Hero, Banjo, Terry

July 2019: Banjo, Terry, Byleth

September 2019: Terry, Byleth, 6

November 2019: Byleth, 6, 7

January 2020: 6, 7, 8

March 2020: 6 announced but not released, 7, 8, 9?

This is where things get log jammed a bit. By this model, it suggests that work on 8 probably started in January and 9 might have started in March/April but we have no real way to confirm this. What's notable about this is how much it lines up with the timeline of the Fighter's Pass and even Smash 4's DLC.

April 2015: Mewtwo released, Lucas, Roy, and Ryu being worked on.

April 2019: Joker released, Hero, Banjo, and Terry being worked on.

April 2020: heavily implied 6 was to originally release here, 7, 8, and 9 being worked on?

Of course, one main difference is that Smash 4 had a bonus character in the form of Mewtwo and the Fighter's Pass had Plant. Season 2 doesn't have a bonus character, at least not yet, but would likely come before 6 if it were to follow past precedent. But, hold up, Slender also reminded us the other day that the Fighter's Pass working model was actually this:

December 2018: Joker, Hero, and Banjo

Instead of this:

December 2018: Plant, Joker, and Hero

Why is this significant? While Banjo wasn't in the game's code yet, Plant was in the final debugging stages so was virtually "done", meaning they technically work on 4 characters at a time. Let's go back at the Fighter's Pass and apply this same principle. This:

July 2019: Banjo, Terry, and Byleth

Turns into this:

July 2019: Terry, Byleth, and 6

This lines up with our hypothesis that Season 2 began around E3 last year. Let's keep going:

September 2019: Byleth, 6, 7

November 2019: 6, 7, 8

January 2020: 6, 7, 8, 9?

March 2020: 6, 7, 8, 9, 10?

Hold up... Most of Season 2 being worked on by June 2020? That doesn't sound right and it likely isn't. Let's suppose Season 2 is getting a bonus character like Smash 4 and the Fighter's Pass and now see what it looks like:

September 2019: Byleth, B, 6

November 2019: B, 6, 7

January: 6, 7, 8

March: 7, 8, 9

Notice how under this model 6 disappears in March not because it has released but because it's gone into the final stages of debugging... Which Sakurai outright said happened in March. Under this model, B was supposed to release in April but didn't. Why does this sound familiar?

-Mewtwo to E3 2015 (about a two and a half month gap)

-Plant to Joker (about a two and a half month gap)

-Joker to E3 2019 (roughly a two month gap)

Coincidentally, the gap between Byleth's announcement and 6's announcement was, you guessed it, roughly two months. What's interesting about this is that this means that 6 is being released on its intended schedule and that B was the one that was held back. Coincidentally, this also lines up with our Polish Amiibo leak that says there's going to be a major Smash rerelease in September. Mid June to September? A little more than two months, once again showing us a time gap that regularly occured not only in the Fighter's Pass but also Smash 4.

LET'S GOOOOO!!! Going off of this then, we could be seeing either:

A. ARMS reveal + release date, bonus character reveal and release (same day), and CP 7 reveal + release date

B. ARMS reveal + release date, bonus character reveal and release (dame day), CP 7 reveal + release date, and CP 8 reveal + release date

All this content would be perfect for a Smash-focused Direct.

 

[Qeomash]

I still think there's no benefit to attempting to do takedowns of "leaked" content. All a it would do is cause everyone to be aware of it even more, known as the Streisand Effect. Removing videos or images on the internet is mostly an exercise in futility, so for something as relatively small as an image leak there isn't much financial reason to do so. Once the image is out there on the internet, you can't really remove it.

Ignoring them completly is honestly the best way for Nintendo to handle the Ken leak, Grinch, and Cacomallow.

 

[Firox]

Honestly, the only leak I think Nintendo directly took care of in regards to Smash Ultimate was Byleth's original VA, Christ Niosi, bragging about being chosen as the voice for Byleth in Three Houses. He mentioned something about being in Smash if Byleth makes the cut and BAM, he got replaced. I think Nintendo counted that as breaking NDA, and may have been the true reason they recast the character. Apparently it was claimed that he broke NDA by announcing that he voiced the character in Three Houses before the game launched, but that seems fishy to me.

I, however, choose to believe he broke NDA (for Smash). Because, as we all know, Byleth did make the cut and probably had already had his lines recorded before then.

Have you ever seen the movie "This is the End" with Seth Rogen and James Franco? This whole scenario with Niosi reminds me of the part when James Franco decides to sacrifice himself to the cannibals to save his friends. The selfless act allows him to be lifted up to Heaven in a pillar of light until he starts taunting and flipping off the cannibals, bragging about how gets to go to Heaven and they don't. Then, because he ended up being such a douche about it, the light disappears and he falls into the arms of the now-pissed cannibals. Let it be a lesson to people: Don't brag about **** until AFTER you've sealed the deal. Otherwise, you'll just look dumb when you get the boot....and get eaten by cannibals.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

I still think there's no benefit to attempting to do takedowns of "leaked" content. All a it would do is cause everyone to be aware of it even more, known as the Streisand Effect. Removing videos or images on the internet is mostly an exercise in futility, so for something as relatively small as an image leak there isn't much financial reason to do so. Once the image is out there on the internet, you can't really remove it.

Ignoring them completly is honestly the best way for Nintendo to handle the Ken leak, Grinch, and Cacomallow.

It's a terrible idea. As someone who knows NDA's alone, you should know why they even take it down. If Nintendo leaves any leaked content up related to any other company, they hard lose that company's trust. They expect Nintendo to avoid any leaks and they have key agreements in order to keep everything in secret till the agreed release time.

It doesn't matter if they "prove it's real" by that. This is a legality issue, not some "trick the people" issue. It never mattered if taking it down proves a thing. That's irrelevant in legal terms for them. They have to take it down or lose business. There's no ifs, ands, or buts. It not being taken down was never an option.

It's a hard fake once knowing how NDA's and business work. I wasn't even aware of how important NDA's are either till you brought up the website leak stuff some weeks back. That confirmed how important it was.

They can't pull what you're talking about. Unless it's 100% their own content with absolutely zero 3rd party stuff, and even then, NDA factors exist. They can't trust the employee who put it up, cause that means they could leak stuff from other games that they don't own 100% of the content of, which could completely ruins their business with other companies.

Your idea is completely unfeasible and no company ever does this. They always have taken down anything mainstream leak-wise for business and legality reasons. No exceptions. Ever.

 

[Fatmanonice]

pinshadow I'd argue that there's one big talking point to why Plant probably wasn't planned for base: it's the only original newcomer that doesn't have a trailer. Every new base game character since Smash 4 has had a cinematic trailer except Daisy, Chrom, and Dark Samus. Plant was basically treated like Mewtwo was in Smash 4.

 

[Polarthief]

It's a fuzzy road considering Nintendo didn't take this down:

This was widespread and they didn't do anything about it.

Well yeah there you go. I was always on the fence of "CM is real", but people in here have said "there's no way Nintendo would let them keep it up, and if they did, Square or Bethesda would have done something, and if no one did, that would be the end of partnerships" or something. Honestly, I do think it's weird they haven't done anything, but at the same time, keeping Smash stuff under wraps is super important for them. Idk how to respond to the song takedowns (maybe they thought we wouldn't notice?), but yeah. It's also possible they simply haven't heard of CacoMallow. Crazy I know, but it's possible.

 

[MattX20]

The Cacomallow thing will either be proven accurate or debunked over the next two fighters. That's all there is to it right now

 

[Qeomash]

It's a terrible idea. As someone who knows NDA's alone, you should know why they even take it down. If Nintendo leaves any leaked content up related to any other company, they hard lose that company's trust. They expect Nintendo to avoid any leaks and they have key agreements in order to keep everything in secret till the agreed release time.

It doesn't matter if they "prove it's real" by that. This is a legality issue, not some "trick the people" issue. It never mattered if taking it down proves a thing. That's irrelevant in legal terms for them. They have to take it down or lose business. There's no ifs, ands, or buts. It not being taken down was never an option.

It's a hard fake once knowing how NDA's and business work. I wasn't even aware of how important NDA's are either till you brought up the website leak stuff some weeks back. That confirmed how important it was.

They can't pull what you're talking about. Unless it's 100% their own content with absolutely zero 3rd party stuff, and even then, NDA factors exist. They can't trust the employee who put it up, cause that means they could leak stuff from other games that they don't own 100% of the content of, which could completely ruins their business with other companies.

Your idea is completely unfeasible and no company ever does this. They always have taken down anything mainstream leak-wise for business and legality reasons. No exceptions. Ever.

Legally, yes, Nintendo can and probably should go after any leaked content. But it's always up to what they can feasibly do. There is no way they could actually remove the Ken leak from the internet. They could issue some takedowns to reddit, smashboards, whomever. It'll be back on those sites within an hour if they did.

They'll go after what they can, which would be the employee who leaked it. That's taking care of the problem. Wasting a lawyer's time to chase jpegs and issue takedowns of a few short videos is a waste of money.

Edit: I should mention that yes, if something like the trailer for Banjo leaked a few days before his reveal they would take something like that down because that is a pretty big piece of their marketing strategy and would impact the announcement and release of it. Especially if the release is imminent. A clip of gameplay for costumes that will be about 10 seconds of the eventual announcement video is not worth it, by comparison.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Legally, yes, Nintendo can and probably should go after any leaked content. But it's always up to what they can feasibly do. There is no way they could actually remove the Ken leak from the internet. They could issue some takedowns to reddit, smashboards, whomever. It'll be back on those sites within an hour if they did.

How are they going to remove a 4chan image? It's not comparable. You actually think they knew it exists, even then? The most likely thing is they didn't know it exists. Reddit and Smashboards aren't mainstream sites on the internet. They're just another random site that doesn't post videos all that much on their own.

They can't do anything if they don't know a bit about it. Which, well, they don't.

They'll go after what they can, which would be the employee who leaked it. That's taking care of the problem. Wasting a lawyer's time to chase jpegs and issue takedowns of a few short videos is a waste of money.

It's not a waste of money to them. What's a waste of money is letting it stay up because of how much business they'll easily lose from other companies. Taking action is a requirement, not an option. Companies can quite clearly see if they let leaks go through. You expect them to trust them again? Hell no. That'd be idiotic to do business with them if they won't go after leakers. NDA's become worthless. There was never once a choice for Nintendo or any other company. It's "take down video leaks of which they literally can or lose business". Obviously they will not lose business.

Now here's what actually happened; Nintendo has never taken down a random jpeg on the internet. It's never been on an actual mainstream image site they know of so they could do so. They didn't touch the ERSB leak until it hit Youtube, and all they could take action against was the video alone, since that alone is tied to a real life person they can track.

Videos have not gotten exceptions as long as they're on a mainstream website like Youtube, which Nintendo actually has a channel there and pays attention to. They don't care about Smashboards, Reddit, GameFAQs, or other completely small websites that they have no business with nor ever did. We're as notable as 4chan to them(which is something that's irrelevant to them), or for that matter, a tiny little forum from a server you've never heard of(like InsideTheWeb. Ever hear of that? Probably not. That's how irrelevant we are for them to check up on).

Edit: I should mention that yes, if something like the trailer for Banjo leaked a few days before his reveal they would take something like that down because that is a pretty big piece of their marketing strategy and would impact the announcement and release of it. Especially if the release is imminent. A clip of gameplay for costumes that will be about 10 seconds of the eventual announcement video is not worth it, by comparison.

Since it would hurt their business with two companies straight, taking it down is worth it too. Id Software/Betheseda(I forget who owns Doom) and Square-Enix aren't going to trust Nintendo if they allow leaks to stay up when they can clearly take action. And that's with SE making fake leaks intentionally beforehand. They take it very seriously. For that matter, you expect those companies besides Nintendo to allow it up, especially if it's possible their employees may have leaked it? No. It's going to be taken down, asap. Again, there isn't an exception here. Companies cannot make an exception under any condition. I'll repeat again; they cannot afford to lose business because of a horrible strategy to "make it look fake". Not when legal issues exist. That's a game no company can play without major consequences.

 

[Lord Woomy]

Reddit and Smashboards aren't mainstream sites on the internet. They're just another random site that doesn't post videos all that much on their own.

They can't do anything if they don't know a bit about it. Which, well, they don't.

Sorry, but this is just wholly incorrect about Reddit. Reddit is a mainstream site. It has an Alexa score of 19, making it the 19th most visited website on the entire internet.
(source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reddit )

 

[Polarthief]

Again, there isn't an exception here. Companies cannot make an exception under any condition. I'll repeat again; they cannot afford to lose business because of a horrible strategy to "make it look fake". Not when legal issues exist. That's a game no company can play without major consequences.

But with Smash, there's so many fake (and even sometimes real) leaks that don't you think it's possible they understand that and rather than taking down the real ones, they just leave the floodgates open on them? I'm well aware of the legality of it, but isn't it at all possible they may have even discussed things like "what if leaks pop up?" beforehand? This might be digging a bit deep to add meaning as to "why this hasn't been taken down yet", but I'm just trying to keep an open mind and look at all possibilities before going "no, this is how it is, no exceptions". I'm completely aware that it's very unorthodox, but I don't think any game, and I truly do mean *any* game gets as many fake leaks as Smash does, and an unorthodox approach might be the best way for companies involved to approach it. We have no idea what actually goes on behind the scenes, but time will tell. If we see a Mallow costume and Cacodemon hat in the next few costume waves, we'll have our definitive answer.

 

[Qeomash]

How are they going to remove a 4chan image? It's not comparable. You actually think they knew it exists, even then? The most likely thing is they didn't know it exists. Reddit and Smashboards aren't mainstream sites on the internet. They're just another random site that doesn't post videos all that much on their own.

They surely knew about the Ken leak since it was covered by a few random outlets. Large companies like Nintendo have people watching for things like that.

It's not a waste of money to them. What's a waste of money is letting it stay up because of how much business they'll easily lose from other companies. Taking action is a requirement, not an option. Companies can quite clearly see if they let leaks go through. You expect them to trust them again? Hell no. That'd be idiotic to do business with them if they won't go after leakers. NDA's become worthless. There was never once a choice for Nintendo or any other company. It's "take down video leaks of which they literally can or lose business". Obviously they will not lose business.

It absolutely is a waste of money, which is why they don't do it. It's all about how much they think something like this will affect them. A tiny image leak that is completly out of context to an announcement will not affect sales, so they don't pursue it. If someone leaked the Byleth splash screen, they might go after it but probably not. If someone leaked the entire announcement video? Absolutely, they'd go after it and take it down pretty fast. It's all about what's feasible and actually worth it.

Now here's what actually happened; Nintendo has never taken down a random jpeg on the internet. It's never been on an actual mainstream image site they know of so they could do so. They didn't touch the ERSB leak until it hit Youtube, and all they could take action against was the video alone, since that alone is tied to a real life person they can track.

Exactly, they don't go after jpegs because it's not worth it. See my above statement.

They don't care about Smashboards, Reddit, GameFAQs, or other completely small websites that they have no business with nor ever did. We're as notable as 4chan to them(which is something that's irrelevant to them), or for that matter, a tiny little forum from a server you've never heard of(like InsideTheWeb. Ever hear of that? Probably not. That's how irrelevant we are for them to check up on).

Actually, Nintendo does care about sites like Smashboards, Reddit, and GameFAQs. The have marketing/PR people who read these sites for market research. Do they spend all day on Smashboards? No, they probably look once a week.

Also, a bit on terminology: NDAs are not the end all, be all of take down related legal stuff. In fact, you can't issue a takedown because of an NDA. NDAs are signed between two parties, like an employee and Nintendo. Or another company and Nintendo that basically mean, "I will not leak this." The legal consequences of breaking an NDA are not related to taking them down on the internet. Sure, if I post something to my own personal Facebook account that is covered under an NDA, I can be asked to take it down. Me, not Facebook, can be asked to take it down in that case. But if it's reposted elsewhere by someone else (or I gave it to someone who posted it elsewhere), it's now beyond the scope of the NDA. The consequences of breaking an NDA are confined to the two parties within the agreement. I as a (hypotetical) employee will likely face employment and monetary consequences for breaking the NDA in general.

Taking something down outside of an NDA is when it becomes a copyright strike/DMCA takedown. Nintendo can go after it because it's their property, not because it's part of an NDA.

 

[Droodle]

Having a hard time finding anything in this post to be serious let alone half of it

Contrary to who I replied too, Crash is literally more recognizable then 2B and there is no debating that (except maybe in Japan nowadays). They both released in the same year, and while Nier: Automata did 4 million sales, Crash Bandicoot N' Sane Trilogy did 10million+. Arguing that people don't know Crash because they weren't born before "the 21st century", yet recognize 2B comes off as pretty ****** stupid because chances are that most of the people who bought the N' Sane Trilogy consist of people who were born post-2001.

Same with saying that people who don't want Isaac are supporters of the likes of Sora, 2B, or more Fire Emblem characters and use the term "generic anime swordsman" unironically, and "we'll" win over them. It comes off as very "US VS THEM", when chances are that people who want more swordfighters aren't going to be complaining about "generic anime swordsman characters". The entire "generic anime swordsman" meme brings out the worst in the Smash community. Want an example? Look here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/smashbros/..._smash_bros_ultimate_the_hero_reveal_trailer/

When Hero got revealed, there were tons of toxic comments because how he's another "generic anime swordsman" and how Banjo deserved to get in far more. Some of them are still up, but tons of them particularly the ones using the "generic anime swordsman" term were deleted/edited right after Banjo was revealed.

At worst, "generic anime swordsman" is applied to characters a large portion of the community (or a vocal minority) as a complaint for any "anime swordfighter that I do not think should be in Smash". Comparatively to Hero in the West, Isaac is still highly requested, so none of the people that are in it only for the roster are going to be using that term; especially not huge fans of other anime swords fighters like Sora, FE characters, 2B, Dante, Rex, etc (they're not stupid). At most those fans are going to be saying that "I think Sora/2B/Dante would make for a more unique character then Isaac", which is a completely different issue all together.

The point is that a character's fanbase is diverse; the 2B fanbase isn't filled with post 21st century people who don't know who Crash is. The Isaac fanbase isn't filled with "boomers", there are plenty of "zoomers" that like Golden Sun/Isaac; likewise, the Geno/Crash fanbases aren't filled with boomers. The Sora fanbase isn't filled with people who use the term "generic anime swordsman" unironically.

Obviously there's good/bad in every fanbase, lets be honest chances are that plenty of people here got upset that a "generic anime swordsman" like Hero/Byleth made it before Geno. However, despite this; there's plenty of overlap BETWEEN these fanbases too, someone can be a Crash supporter and also want 2B in Smash. Or Isaac and Sora.

The post I replied to perfectly encapsulates why there's a huge stigma about the Geno fanbase within the larger Smash community, and I can't believe that a ton of people agree with it. Obviously there is a lot of competition within the community about who "deserves" to get in next; but we shouldn't be reinforcing this idea of "us vs them" and that we'll "win over the other fanbases". Every character request (no matter how niche) is valid and there's plenty of crossover between fanbases; using the term "we've won over the other fanbases" just makes you sound like a toxic person who just wants to stir **** up.

Obviously, that isn't not to say there isn't already a ton of toxicity in the Smash fanbase; because there absolutely is, there's a reason a ton of message boards absolutely hate Smash. That said, I hope that the larger Smash community stops thinking as if DLC in a video game revolves around them; likewise I would kindly ask people to stop being insanely toxic after every "generic anime swordsman" or "Another FE rep". On the other hand, I would kindly ask people to stop spamming **** like "HOES MAD" after every reveal.

At the very least I hope larger Geno community doesn't resort to stuff like "HOES MAD" if Geno ends up getting in, but stuff like that is just a byproduct of how toxic the overall community is; so I don't have my hopes up.

 

[Polarthief]

I think worrying about the legality of CacoMallow is just odd overall. We have what looks to be a very legitimate leak and people are just believing it to be fake because it hasn't been taken down, kinda like how people think Spirits can't be promoted because we haven't had one yet, despite the evidence that it's looking very likely at least one (or more) will be happening.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

But with Smash, there's so many fake (and even sometimes real) leaks that don't you think it's possible they understand that and rather than taking down the real ones, they just leave the floodgates open on them? I'm well aware of the legality of it, but isn't it at all possible they may have even discussed things like "what if leaks pop up?" beforehand? This might be digging a bit deep to add meaning as to "why this hasn't been taken down yet", but I'm just trying to keep an open mind and look at all possibilities before going "no, this is how it is, no exceptions". I'm completely aware that it's very unorthodox, but I don't think any game, and I truly do mean *any* game gets as many fake leaks as Smash does, and an unorthodox approach might be the best way for companies involved to approach it. We have no idea what actually goes on behind the scenes, but time will tell. If we see a Mallow costume and Cacodemon hat in the next few costume waves, we'll have our definitive answer.

They've never ignored a single real leak on Youtube. This is an exception. No, they don't "possibly" understand that. There's no floodgates to leave open here. This isn't some option. They can't risk losing business because it'd confirm something to the public eye and randos on a forum. It's a game they'd be playing with horrible consequences. Which is why they never once played that game. No other company has nor ever will. They aren't stupid. They damn well know they need to act upon the NDA because their interest is business, not what some randos think.

Between leaving something up to trick people and taking it down(if they can) to keep business, it's pretty obvious what every company will do. It's not rocket science.

They surely knew about the Ken leak since it was covered by a few random outlets. Large companies like Nintendo have people watching for things like that.

And how are they going to go after the original user? It was posted on 4chan, which they, you know, can't do anything about. They have no way to catch the leaker. That's why it wasn't taken down. Not comparable to any Youtube leaks which they 100% have taken down, though not always catching the original leaker. But they need to follow the NDA too, as they're legally obliged to.

It absolutely is a waste of money, which is why they don't do it. It's all about how much they think something like this will affect them. A tiny image leak that is completly out of context to an announcement will not affect sales, so they don't pursue it. If someone leaked the Byleth splash screen, they might go after it but probably not. If someone leaked the entire announcement video? Absolutely, they'd go after it and take it down pretty fast. It's all about what's feasible and actually worth it.

And the video was leaked here but ignored. A major gameplay leak for them. That's huge and affects multiple companies. They aren't going to ignore it. And if they can take down a specific image, they'd still do so too. 99% of them comes from sites they do not know about. And no, there's no real chance they knew where the Ken leak originated from so of course they can't take action. Originating from 4chan doesn't count, cause they can't catch the original poster regardless.

Lol, it's not a waste of time at any point. They have to catch the leaker or try their hardest so the companies they work with are willing to trust them. Once again, zero exceptions. If they know about it, and can take action, they will.

Exactly, they don't go after jpegs because it's not worth it. See my above statement.

This is incorrect. They actually do attempt to, but almost never can catch the leaker. If a 4chan leak is ignored, it's because of two reasons; the image will get erased and their problem is solved, or because they can't legitimately catch the leaker. They don't try to make exceptions. They do what they can and sometimes they have no ability to do anything.

Actually, Nintendo does care about sites like Smashboards, Reddit, and GameFAQs. The have marketing/PR people who read these sites for market research. Do they spend all day on Smashboards? No, they probably look once a week.

And we cannot post videos they can go after. We don't have a way to upload on our videos last I checked. They still cannot really do anything due to SB's own policy, so their hands are tied. We're a lot smaller than you think.

Also, a bit on terminology: NDAs are not the end all, be all of take down related legal stuff. In fact, you can't issue a takedown because of an NDA. NDAs are signed between two parties, like an employee and Nintendo. Or another company and Nintendo that basically mean, "I will not leak this." The legal consequences of breaking an NDA are not related to taking them down on the internet. Sure, if I post something to my own personal Facebook account that is covered under an NDA, I can be asked to take it down. Me, not Facebook, can be asked to take it down in that case. But if it's reposted elsewhere by someone else (or I gave it to someone who posted it elsewhere), it's now beyond the scope of the NDA. The consequences of breaking an NDA are confined to the two parties within the agreement. I as a (hypotetical) employee will likely face employment and monetary consequences for breaking the NDA in general.

That doesn't really change the point. They have to do something about the leaker to keep the trust among other companies alive. So action still is taken due to the NDA being broken.

Taking something down outside of an NDA is when it becomes a copyright strike/DMCA takedown. Nintendo can go after it because it's their property, not because it's part of an NDA.

The NDA matters for other reasons. My bad on the legality issues, but the point stands. They will not risk losing business because they'd become untrustworthy if they ignore leakers when they clearly can take action. As I noted above, you cannot upload videos to a lot of those sites in question, and they sure as hell don't know about anything on 4chan(a tiny site that isn't remotely mainstream), so it makes sense why they take down leaked videos on places like Youtube because they're the only place they actually know of and directly allows the uploading of videos. It's a two-part process.

 

[Enigma735]

I can't comment on the legality of Nintendo taking down CacoMallow, but I do think its the one red flag in this leak. I personally feel their is more compelling evidence in its favor though and would not be shocked if it ended up being a legitimate leak. Very soon we should get our answer. We just gotta wait and see

 

[CannonStreak]

I can't comment on the legality of Nintendo taking down CacoMallow, but I do think its the one red flag in this leak. I personally feel their is more compelling evidence in its favor though and would not be shocked if it ended up being a legitimate leak. Very soon we should get our answer. We just gotta wait and see

Wait, what happened to CacoMallow? Has it been taken down?

 

[Polarthief]

Wait, what happened to CacoMallow? Has it been taken down?

No, it's the fact that it *hasn't* been taken down that people are questioning the legitimacy of it.

 

[CannonStreak]

No, it's the fact that it *hasn't* been taken down that people are questioning the legitimacy of it.

Why would that be the case? I mean, the Ken leak NintendoKnight posted was never taken down, and it came true. Same could happen with the CacoMallow leak, or not. Either way, I don't see why it not being taken down warrants questioning of it. Sure, it has been a bit too long since it came into existence, but it could still turn out true.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Why would that be the case? I mean, the Ken leak NintendoKnight posted was never taken down, and it came true. Same could happen with the CacoMallow leak, or not. Either way, I don't see why it not being taken down warrants questioning of it. Sure, it has been a bit too long since it came into existence, but it could still turn out true.

Because to take down images they need to track who originally posted it, and 4chan users are anonymous. Nintendo cannot take action. Images are extremely difficult to track since almost none come from websites that Nintendo knows of. They only often know of anything due to a reupload on an entirely different website(that's super mainstream) by someone else.

Videos on Youtube they easily found out about within the week and they have taken down every real YT leak without fail.

Videos and Images are massively different situations, and the context of where they are posted matters too. If Nintendo or a company doesn't know about it, they can't take action either. Knowing a website exists is meaningless if you can't catch or take action on the particular item.

 

[Polarthief]

and they have taken down every real YT leak without fail.

Not to be That Guy and ask for specific examples, but because I wasn't around doing Smash speculation until Ultimate, can you give specific examples? I don't even know of any legitimate/real leaks besides Banjo being leaked just before E3 last year, Ken's leak, and the ESRB leak prior.

 

[CannonStreak]

Verde Coeden Scalesworth I see. So where was this CacoMallow leak originate from, anyway?

 

[Griselda]

I've said this before, but does it matter, either way? What's the point of trying to disprove CacoMallow, at this point?

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Verde Coeden Scalesworth I see. So where was this CacoMallow leak originate from, anyway?

4chan video. And then on Youtube. Youtube wouldn't have been ignored if it was real. Nintendo doesn't ever do that.

Not to be That Guy and ask for specific examples, but because I wasn't around doing Smash speculation until Ultimate, can you give specific examples? I don't even know of any legitimate/real leaks besides Banjo being leaked just before E3 last year, Ken's leak, and the ESRB leak prior.

ERSB Leak, the giant amount of Nintendo website leaks on Youtube. Both were immediately taken down. The latter user was arrested for leaking that too. I don't know if the ERSB Leaker lost their job or whatnot, or if they were ever caught. If it was said, that was years ago and I forgot. But those are the only examples I can remember.

Banjo didn't have gameplay leaks on Youtube, last I checked? There was the Shinobi leak, and Vergeben also saying it, but this isn't the same as a video leak on Youtube(or other major video websites).

 

[CannonStreak]

4chan video. And then on Youtube. Youtube wouldn't have been ignored if it was real. Nintendo doesn't ever do that.


ERSB Leak, the giant amount of Nintendo leaks on Youtube. Both were immediately taken down.

Banjo didn't have gameplay leaks on Youtube, last I checked? There was the Shinobi leak, and Vergeben also saying it, but this isn't the same as a video leak on Youtube(or other major video websites).

So, you're saying if Nintendo found out about it, it would have been taken down?

And this is a difference case from the Ken image leak due to that leak, well, being an image, and this CacoMallow leak began as a video?

I still think there is a possibility of this CacoMallow leak being real, but I think chances for it being real have gone down for me with this.

 

[Polarthief]

But those are the only examples I can remember.

So... two? "They always take down every leak immediately", but this statement only applies to *two* leaks? That doesn't really sway my thoughts in CM. Here I thought there were tons of leaks that were taken down, but so far it was only two. Idk, that just seems like a "so what" kind of situation instead of a "this is a factual rule that is most definite since they've been doing it forever now". Two things doesn't even form a pattern yet.

I totally get the legality, I understand that it should be taken down, but again, there could be an agreement behind the scenes. They could have caught the guy for all we know, but chosen to not bring more attention to the leak. They really, *really* don't want things to be leaked for people this time around, to the point where Sakurai is even talking about that, and removing a leak would definitely being way more attention to it.

Though we're just going in circles. Is it real? Is it fake? We'll probably know in the next week, but we surely won't for now.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

So, you're saying if Nintendo found out about it, it would have been taken down?

And this is a difference case from the Ken image leak due to that leak, well, being an image, and this CacoMallow leak began as a video?

I still think there is a possibility of this CacoMallow leak being real, but I think chances for it being real have gone down for me with this.

You nailed it pretty much.

Basically, the Ken image was from 4chan, and it was impossible to catch the anonymous user at that point. The original poster was gone and it was already erased and reuploaded. There's nothing to do as image leaks are a lot harder to deal with.

If CacoMallow never left 4chan? It might actually be real. Cause it'd just be erased there anyway and Nintendo couldn't take action. But they wouldn't miss their chance to remove it by now. Months on end. Do note since it's using the IP without permission, they can take down Mod videos too anyway, so even if it was taken down immediately, it might've still been fake. But now? It's too late to remove it either way. Protecting their IP would require them to actually act as soon as they know of it. They've clearly known about it, on Youtube, for 6 months. So either way, it not going down is what killed the leak at this point.

So... two? "They always take down every leak immediately", but this statement only applies to *two* leaks? That doesn't really sway my thoughts in CM. Here I thought there were tons of leaks that were taken down, but so far it was only two. Idk, that just seems like a "so what" kind of situation instead of a "this is a factual rule that is most definite since they've been doing it forever now". Two things doesn't even form a pattern yet.

I totally get the legality, I understand that it should be taken down, but again, there could be an agreement behind the scenes. They could have caught the guy for all we know, but chosen to not bring more attention to the leak. They really, *really* don't want things to be leaked for people this time around, to the point where Sakurai is even talking about that, and removing a leak would definitely being way more attention to it.

Though we're just going in circles. Is it real? Is it fake? We'll probably know in the next week, but we surely won't for now.

The thing is, that's still 100% of the time anyway. There's probably other examples I can't think of. I can ask around too, but the answer will always be "yes, yes they do, no exceptions".

If those costumes were real, they could've had them saved for Challenger Pack 7 or 8 too. The "timeframe" is irrelevant anyway.

Though I can remember they immediately took down Smash 4's advertisement because Ganondorf was leaked in it, as well as fixing the website Castlevania leak too. They take these things extremely seriously, and who can blame them. Besides that, Smash 3DS, which was not released officially, had its streams taken down on Twitch when it leaked Master Core. They also removed advertisements/videos that they made a mistake with, leaking Ness, Jigglypuff, and Lucario at one point. They've been massively adamant about keeping them in check. Remember that gameplay leak of Paper Mario: The Origama King about the battle system? That was taken down too since it wasn't supposed to be up yet. It's been pretty consistent. They've had extremely few video leaks, simply put.

The policy has always been to take down leaks. They're not going to "agree" to do so otherwise. It's a massive stretch that makes ARMS look non-flexible, to put it simply.

 

[Lord Woomy]

So, you're saying if Nintendo found out about it, it would have been taken down?

And this is a difference case from the Ken image leak due to that leak, well, being an image, and this CacoMallow leak began as a video?

I still think there is a possibility of this CacoMallow leak being real, but I think chances for it being real have gone down for me with this.

It means next to nothing for CacoMallow lol
Nintendo didn't try to suppress Ken Leak's existence despite numerous vids covering it ending up on Youtube. When Nintendo does go nuclear on a leak, they take down vids covering it (I specifically remember there being a controversy about Nintendo claiming vids that simply just analyzed Pokemon Sw/Sh breaking street date). Also, remember when Nintendo copyright claimed a mod for KOS-MOS and everyone screeched that it 100% confirmed her inclusion?
Ken Leak also showed off 3rd party content, if Nintendo was afraid about harming relationships with 3rd parties, they would've done it with Ken as they'd have been afraid about pissing off Capcom.
Let's just stop pretending we suddenly know everything there is to know about Nintendo's legal protocol, because we really really really don't based on everything I'm reading lol

 

[CannonStreak]

It means next to nothing for CacoMallow lol
Nintendo didn't try to suppress Ken Leak's existence despite numerous vids covering it ending up on Youtube. When Nintendo does go nuclear on a leak, they take down vids covering it (I specifically remember there being a controversy about Nintendo claiming vids that simply just analyzed Pokemon Sw/Sh breaking street date).
Ken Leak also showed off 3rd party content, if Nintendo was afraid about harming relationships with 3rd parties, they would've done it with Ken as they'd have been afraid about pissing off Capcom.
Let's just stop pretending we suddenly know everything there is to know about Nintendo's legal protocol, because we really really really don't based on everything I'm reading lol

Your point on the third party thing? Geno is owned by Square Enix, and that is third party.

Plus, Verde Coeden Scalesworth pretty much said everything else I had to say.

 

[Lord Woomy]

Your point on the third party thing? Geno is owned by Square Enix, and that is third party.

Plus, Verde Coeden Scalesworth Verde Coeden Scalesworth pretty much said everything else I had to say.

My point is, it's been brought up that Nintendo would DMCA all vids containing NDA 3rd Party content, which Ken contained but Ken never was taken down despite the image spreading like wild fire. Basically, neither were taken down despite both containing 3rd party content. Ken was obviously real and CacoMallow is still unconfirmed, so it bodes better for CacoMallow.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Videos covering a picture leak is not remotely the same thing as an actual leak of video footage. They can't even trace the original image leaker in that case, so taking action means nothing.

Those are not "video leaks". Video leaks are leaks of video footage, and have always been taken down by Nintendo without fail. Even ones they accidentally leaked themselves. Their track record is 100%. It's not going to change to "prove" something. What they care about is business with other companies, and if a leak can hurt their business, they'll do their best to remove it.

Again, it's comparable apples to gorillas in how different the situation is. "Image leaks" are not plausible to go after and never have been.

 

[CannonStreak]

My point is, it's been brought up that Nintendo would DMCA all vids containing NDA 3rd Party content, which Ken contained but Ken never was taken down despite the image spreading like wild fire. Basically, neither were taken down despite both containing 3rd party content. Ken was obviously real and CacoMallow is still unconfirmed, so it bodes better for CacoMallow.

I think you are being too optimistic here. I believe what Beth said. It's not just about third party issues, but the fact that tracking down those who post images of leaks are harder to track down than those who post videos. Remember, just because it hasn't been taken down yet, doesn't mean it is real. People are basically questioning the leak now, and while they may not be right in the end, they still have reason to do so.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Nintendo doesn't take down "all DMCA NDA 3rd party content". That's never been the case. They've only taken down leaked footage of any game on Youtube without fail if they're involved. Even leaked footage they leaked themselves. It's been extremely consistent.

You're talking about something entirely different, Lord Woomy. It's not an all-encompassing thing in the way you think it is. Pictures simply do not count for how it goes. But as noted, you can't do anything about a random picture. For them, taking down the video is meaningless because it's the picture they need to find the original owner of. Which they can't. Thus, taking down a video that discusses a leak isn't identical to taking down a video that specifically has leaked footage. If a video that discusses leaked footage exists, they'd take it down too simply because of the "leaked footage".

Hopefully that clears up the massive differences in how they act.

 

[MattX20]

Hmm...apart from miscellaneous animations, I can't think of anything else left to discuss for Geno before the presentation.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Hmm...apart from miscellaneous animations, I can't think of anything else left to discuss for Geno before the presentation.

Damage values?

What costumes he could come with?

Stage elements/cameos?

Music?

The trailer?

Sure, some may be a rehash, but it's fun to retalk about ideas~

 

[MrJudd]

Hmm...apart from miscellaneous animations, I can't think of anything else left to discuss for Geno before the presentation.

The only thing I can think of is try and guess the exact release day (of all my time lurking on this thread, this was the only thing that I never saw happen). I'm guessing July 30.

 

[Lord Woomy]

Videos covering a picture leak is not remotely the same thing as an actual leak of video footage. They can't even trace the original image leaker in that case, so taking action means nothing.

Those are not "video leaks". Video leaks are leaks of video footage, and have always been taken down by Nintendo without fail. Even ones they accidentally leaked themselves. Their track record is 100%. It's not going to change to "prove" something. What they care about is business with other companies, and if a leak can hurt their business, they'll do their best to remove it.

Again, it's comparable apples to gorillas in how different the situation is. "Image leaks" are not plausible to go after and never have been.

Ok, but that's not even the issue at hand here. Nintendo wouldn't DMCA a Youtube video of CacoMallow to get back at the original leaker who posted it?
Also, it's been confirmed by insiders that the Ken Leaker was traced down and sacked shortly after the November direct confirmed Ken's inclusion (which just supports the argument that Nintendo has learned the Streisand effect and doesn't take much action on leaks or leakers until after what they leaked has been officially confirmed.) Not to mention, the whole debacle back last November with Sabi and Verge deconfirming a bunch of characters was brought upon by their sources too scared to leak Byleth directly in fear of being fired. If people are scared of just saying a name to the public and being tracked down and fired by Nintendo, you can bet they could track down an image leaker.
I know Ken Leak isn't a video leak, but Nintendo would still have as much of an interest of scrubbing it clean from the internet in similar methods to what they'd do for a video leak. But they didn't because again, that'd just create more talk around it and confirm it.
Image leaks are completely plausible to go after, if Nintendo can find someone for just leaking via text (ie: Sabi and Verge's sources) they'd def be able to track someone down for leaking an image. If Nintendo couldn't track someone down for leaking an image, we'd have had more than one real image leak and I'd bet my left ass cheek on that.

It's not just about third party issues, but the fact that tracking down those who post images of leaks are harder to track down than those who post videos. Remember, just because it hasn't been taken down yet, doesn't mean it is real. People are basically questioning the leak now, and while they may not be right in the end, they still have reason to do so.

It really isn't, at all. Nintendo can find those who leak images just fine based on everything I can tell.