Reposting this from the Isaac thread:
So, I've been thinking about the Grinch leak for a while, and I'd like to break down and analyze some of it.
First, though, I would like to cut down on some of the flaws of the pro-Grinch argument:
he's thinking 47 steps ahead and knows that both Bandai-Namco and Universal studios contract the same obscure French marketing company.
We don't know that this is true. There is, as yet, no confirmation that this company contracts with either Bandai-Namco or Universal Studios, let alone both. While the company he worked for a year ago did contract with Bandai-Namco, the one he currently works for may or may not. Also, this argument fails to consider that Bandai-Namco would not be handling publicity, Nintendo would, since they are the publisher.
Now, as we get to the rest of it, we need to approach the leak logically. Following Occam's Razor, let's simplify things as much as possible. What must be faked in order to pull of this leak?
The answer is actually ridiculously simple. The only thing that needs to be faked is the
Super Smash Bros. Ultimate material. Everything else can be genuine. The leak could actually have been created by someone who works for a publicity company and makes these sorts of promotional materials. The material for
The Grinch could all be genuine, as could his work history with the company. As the meme says "anyone can make a fake leak". Even a publicist. There does not need to be any identity theft or identity fraud for this to be faked. Not even the Snapchat aspect of it was necessarily faked. It could have been something that he sent a friend via Snapchat, never meaning for it to go further and his name to be revealed (though that would mean all of this was created to fool one or two people, which does seem rather farfetched).
The only things that needed to be faked were the actual
Super Smash Bros. Ultimate materials. So, let's look at them for a second.
This is the image that has received the most attention, specifically the multi panel image in the middle. This image, apparently depicting a version of the Battlefield background used in the Mural but with the characters removed, has been reviewed in detail by a number of artists and digital arts enthusiasts, most notably ArtsyOmni, whose video on the subject can be found
here.
I, however, am not an enthusiast or expert in digital art manipulation, nor of artistic techniques or analysis. So I will leave that to those who are.
Instead, I will focus on other, less analyzed aspects of the leaked materials, which I
do have experience with.
Beneath the "LOL" emoji is what appears to be a set of display instructions for a circular hanging display. The display would contain the mural, wrapped into a circle (taking advantage of the fact that the mural's edges merge seamlessly), and suspended from four lines that converge at a single hanging point. This makes it clear that this is a display to be hung from the ceiling, and that the mural image would go on the outside of it.
Now, here is where things get interesting. It has been pointed out by some that the Mural image on this hanging display is not properly scaled, and that the mural would not fit on the display as shown. Whomever has made such an argument is an individual whom I can only assume has never had to set up a retail display, or at least, never actually looked at the instructions for doing so. Because, as someone who has set up dozens, and reviewed the instructions for probably hundreds over the course of seven years work in retail, I can assure you that the instructions for those displays are
NEVER properly scaled. Or properly clipped. Or properly angled. Or properly sized. Or properly representative of the space you actually HAVE on a display to put the items they're telling you will fit there. Or-
Ahem. Apologies. Anyway, the point is, the instruction pages that come with display materials are designed to show you how to assemble them, how to display them, and what to put where. They are never artistically accurate. Literally, NEVER. The only ones I have seen which are accurate in terms of visuals are ones which are simply pictures taken of already assembled displays (which are inferior for the purposes of showing how to assemble such displays to the simple line drawings with cutouts).
The reasoning for the art being off is actually very simple: It's nothing but a placeholder, and it's only purpose is to convey to you what side should face out, or to help confirm which piece you're looking for. Frequently (though not always), if the item being displayed is a book, magazine, or game (anything with a definitive "front") the picture will be skipped entirely, and instead replaced with a simple display of the title in block text. The images which do show up are usually minimal effort. Low quality images, taken from a camera, badly shoved into place, and then clipped to fit the block lines. Sometimes they will be perspective shifted to match the angle of the display. Sometimes not. Sometimes they'll be perspective shifted to NOT match at all (which can be really infuriating to see from someone with mild OCD about clean displays).
Scrolling down, we then see the three panel display. It has been said that these are for a light box display, and that would explain the low quality and color shifting of the art. I do not disagree or argue the point that a light box display would need to be altered in such a way. From personal experience, it would, though I cannot say what the result would be. However, I would argue that the image in question is simply too small to be used effectively for such a purpose. The light box displays I've worked with in the past are frequently quite large, and this one is roughly the size of a single sheet of paper for a three panel display. No. In actuality, this is another page of display instructions. While it is probably display instructions for such a light box, its purpose is merely to highlight which panel goes in which part of the display, to assure that the panels are in order and properly displayed.
And before you ask, the answer is yes. Such instructions do indeed assume that you are a moron who cannot tell which parts of a continuous display image go where just from looking at them.
Below that, we have further block diagrams, including some empty boxes which could be filled with instructions, more photos, or information specific to a particular store or outlet as this material is distributed.
So this entire image is actually a picture of display instructions for promotional material, rather than promotional material itself.
This image, on the other hand, which I have yet to see be artistically analyzed at all, is itself promotional material.
It's a packaged display of a circular item. It has been assumed to be a wristband. While that is possible, I'd actually assume that it is the circular hanging display alluded to in the previous instructions. Edited for correction: I agree it is likely a wristband, both due to the size and the taper at the end, which I had not noted before. You can also see a faint outline of those same hanging instructions in this image, above the banner, that looks as though it's being shown through a blank sheet of paper.
This material also looks incredibly professionally produced, containing packaging and what looks to be card stock or other similar high quality materials.
So, after reviewing these images, the only conclusion I can come to is that this is 100% genuine. Artistic anomalies in the instructions are expected. In fact, I would be honestly shocked if they were not there. This gentleman's role in the company is likely either review of materials, or assembly of the instructions themselves. The images used were likely taken by a worker at this company, on a low quality camera, and jumbled and edited into place to fit the lines and serve their bare purpose of being a placeholder (they were almost assuredly NOT provided by Nintendo). Any artistic analysis of those pieces is utterly irrelevant to the validity of the leak.