The Official Thread For the Sal Romano/Gematsu Leak

[Morbi]

Or maybe, as someone pointed out before, he was vague in his statement in order to protect his job, or was vague because he no longer has the job and at the time of getting his information months ago only knew that a Pokemon from X and Y would be in the game, but didn't know exactly which one. There are many circumstances to consider. We don't know the leaker's position or role, but I'm certain there's a reason he was vague about "pokemon from x and y".

Chorus Men; so he doesn't state an obvious character (in hindsight) like Greninja to protect his job, but he decides to blatantly confirm another "Wii Fit Trainer"?

 

[Bauske]

Chorus Men; so he doesn't state an obvious character (in hindsight) like Greninja to protect his job, but he decides to blatantly confirm another "Wii Fit Trainer"?

Yeah, it isn't a perfect theory. There are a lot of questions that we don't have answers to, unfortunately.

 

[Morbi]

Yeah, it isn't a perfect theory. There are a lot of questions that we don't have answers to, unfortunately.

Agreed, that is why I don't like discussing leaks too much, it becomes more about the circumstances surrounding the leak than the actual leak. Fortunately for us, we should be able to confirm/de-confirm the leak shortly.

 

[Sucumbio]

nah it fits, cause people will be like "bah he's so full of it, no one even knows who these the chorus people are" or something.

owait is greninja an "obscure" pokemon or something?

why does sal get all the ice cream we in the wrong business. next smash game imma be a leaker and... leak stuff... everywhere. ... .

 

[Bauske]

Agreed, that is why I don't like discussing leaks too much, it becomes more about the circumstances surrounding the leak than the actual leak. Fortunately for us, we should be able to confirm/de-confirm the leak shortly.

I don't mind discussing leaks. It can be fun to speculate. What does bother me is when a theory gets presented at concrete evidence, either for or against. There are many possibilities, and so, at the end of the day, you're right. There's not much more we can discuss, but I still like keeping the idea in the back of my mind. Of course, that's probably just because I'm too friggin' excited for Smash and I want to know who all the characters are going to be.

nah it fits, cause people will be like "bah he's so full of it, no one even knows who these the chorus people are" or something.

owait is greninja an "obscure" pokemon or something?

why does sal get all the ice cream we in the wrong business. next smash game imma be a leaker and... leak stuff... everywhere. ... .

Do it on GameFAQs. You'll be a hero there. ;D

 

[Noiblade]

People who say Wii Fit Trainer was a lucky guess, obviously wasn't around when it happened.

Let me break some of this down for you.

Sal Leaks
-Little Mac: Not a bad or hard guess, he's been highly requested
-Mega Man: Same as Little Mac
-Villager: This is a hard guess whether you want to believe it or not. Why? Sakurai said he was "Too cute, and would not make a good fit for a smash game."
-Wii Fit Trainer: Another hard guess, seriously, other than joking people, who would guess this?
-Mii: Not a hard guess either but still not something you would think of
-Pacman: While he is popular, he is a hard-out-of-the-park guess

Now you can say "But Noiblade! They were just lucky guesses!"
Which I would respond with sure maybe Villager could have been, but for sure Wii Fit Trainer wasn't.

Sal leaked 2 extremely hard to guess characters, and 1 semi-easy guess character.
Which would be highly unlikely but possible if the characters were shown at different times. But all at the same time? Doubtful.

Then later Little Mac comes along and gives more strength to the leak.

I'll put it like this, let's say someone gives you the answers to all the questions on a History exam, He gives you 6 of the answers but there are only 3 questions at the exam, and the answers gave to you are the same answers to the questions on the exam. You're done with the exam and you ace it. Does this mean the other answers weren't right? HELL NO.
During a lecture later the professor pops you a question, and that question is one of the questions that someone gave you the answers for early. You get that question right, so why in the world would you think the other 2 answers to questions would be wrong? This also ties into Rosalina, the guy gave you answers to a history exam not a math one, so why would you believe that the history answers were wrong when he never gave you math problem answers in the first place? So the Science exam rolls around(Smash direct) and you get 5 question answers, one is vague and is "It's got 3 letters and a b in it" Then there's only one question on the exam, and it's the one that had the vague answer. And lo and behold there's only one of the answers that fits the criteria and it's right? So why would you believe the other history and science answers are wrong when he's gave you nothing but right answers?

 

[egaddmario]

To anyone who says Wii Fit Trainer was an easy guess, I ask you- if it was such an easy guess, why didn't YOU predict it? Because it wasn't an easy guess. Sakurai even said no one predicted it in his Developer Direct. Face facts- Sal has a source. Whether you like the characters he provided is a different story, but that source is legitimate. When the game drops and Sal is right, people will rage. But all of us who've accepted he's right will enjoy the game that much more because we've already come to terms with the characters on the roster that we didn't want.

 

[Luigi#1]

To anyone who says Wii Fit Trainer was an easy guess, I ask you- if it was such an easy guess, why didn't YOU predict it? Because it wasn't an easy guess. Sakurai even said no one predicted it in his Developer Direct. Face facts- Sal has a source. Whether you like the characters he provided is a different story, but that source is legitimate. When the game drops and Sal is right, people will rage. But all of us who've accepted he's right will enjoy the game that much more because we've already come to terms with the characters on the roster that we didn't want.

Who even thinks it was an easy guess?

 

[egaddmario]

Who even thinks it was an easy guess?

I've seen people saying it was an easy guess on here.

 

[ChunkyBeef]

People who say Wii Fit Trainer was a lucky guess, obviously wasn't around when it happened.

See, the problem lies in the fact that when Sal Romano originally posts his 'leak', he's just another guy predicting E3 reveals. Nothing more, nothing less.

"My unlikely predictions: Little Mac, Pac-Man, Animal Crossing Guy, Mega Man, Wii Fit Trainer, Mii."

Even he admits the picks are unlikely. His post is in PAGE FIFTY of a sixty two page topic on NeoGAF about last year's E3 Direct. Browsing through the topic, it's about what I expect from a message board: lots of reaction pics, lots of predictions, lots of festive joking. Sal Romano's post goes by pretty much unnoticed for a guy known to be trustworthy and have access to leaks here and there, right? Except a few pages later, as the E3 is clearly going on, Villager gets revealed, an equally unlikely pick compared to Wii Fit Trainer, and no-one bats an eyelash at Sal Romano. Which is funny, 'cause if Noiblade's assumption about Villager being a tough pick is correct, then people should've been picking up Sal Romano's 'leak' already by that point. Then Wii Fit Trainer is revealed later. Here are some reactions:

WHAT DO YOU KNOW

Tell me what you know...

Could you make some more unlikely predictions?

Go play the lottery.

The funniest thing? The thing that really grabs me as strange? The NeoGAF thread is wide open still. It's not locked. Anyone can reply to it, even now, almost a year after its conception. But the last post is about a day later. If this were GameFAQ's, or even Smash Boards, people would be going ape ****. That thread should be about ten or twenty pages of people reacting to the 'leak' with pictures and trying to pick Sal Romano's brain. Instead, we get.. nothing.

What? Don't believe me? Go have a look yourself: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=578105&page=62

Doesn't that strike other people as odd? It sure strikes me as odd, but that's just the icing on the cake. Let's go back to Sal Romano's post again.

"My unlikely predictions: Little Mac, Pac-Man, Animal Crossing Guy, Mega Man, Wii Fit Trainer, Mii."

One word sticks out. I'll bold it for you. There we go. Everyone else in the topic is also making predictions for what will appear AT THAT E3. Sal Romano doesn't specify anything else. E3 comes and goes, and we only get three of those. Everyone ignores the fact that the predictions were for E3. Everyone is quick to say that 'Oh, well, Little Mac is confirmed later on!'. All right, fair enough, but where's Mii and Pac-Man?

Fast forward to close to the recent Direct. Gematsu gets a 'leak' from 'the same tipster'. Never minding that the tipster is never mentioned at all during this, and most of the information I've dug up about what we DO know points toward the tipster being untrustworthy, or having given out incorrect or fabricated information in the past. They 'claim' Pac-Man and Mii are still on the way (we can't argue that; for all we know, they still are, but no sign yet), and then slip in some new characters: Palutena, Shulk, Chrom, Chorus Men and X/Y Pokemon. Okay, this leak is a WAYYYYY safer one compared to the last one. Palutena getting in? Believable, Kid Icarus is Sakurai's baby now. Chrom? All signs point to yes. X/Y Pokemon? GF and Nintendo are going to want to advertise their newest Pokemon game, of course.

The problem here lies in two separate places: X/Y Pokemon and Shulk.

It's fine that the guy wants to try to recapture the glory of the Wii Fit Trainer 'cause as of now, the tipster (and Sal Romano by extension) both no longer have their reputations on the line. As I've stated before, if people aren't willing to question the inconsistencies in the two leaks we have already, they're not going to question if any of the listed characters wind up not showing up. "Oh, well, the developing room is an ever-changing landscape!" and other such bullcrap to justify anomalies, but that's for another post, or maybe even topic. Let's get back to X/Y Pokemon and Shulk.

For starters, Shulk is a strange pick, even for Sakurai. Contrary to popular belief, Xenoblade is a relatively obscure Wii game. At 0.86 MILLION sales (that's 860,000 copies), that puts Shulk supporters firmly in the 'vocal minority' section. The game is relatively new and, even with a sequel coming out, the general consensus is that 'X' has a new protagonist. Why advertise Shulk and Xenoblade, when all signs point to them wanting to make the sequel more successful and bring more focus to it? That strikes me as odd, but the real incriminating evidence lies in the Pokemon world.

The immediate reaction to Greninja's announcement was about as one might expect. Excitement, confusion, disappointment.. then everyone gets up and says, 'Sal Romano/Gematsu PREDICTED Greninja!'. Except, well.. no, they didn't. They predicted an X/Y Pokemon, and most Sal Romano/Gematsu supporters are quick to ignore the fact that there's lots of X/Y representation already in the game, including several Pokeball Pokemon. Chiefly, in the Direct, I remember Mega Lucario getting showcased, and there's even a peek at Mega Charizard X, but that's not the strangest thing. The thing that irks me the most about this is, as I've also said in the past, psychics do the same thing. Why specify when faced with 700+ variables, when you can get VAGUE?

I'm not even going to knock Chorus Men here (though considering the Wii version of Rhythm Heaven sold about as much as Xenoblade did and I can't even find sales numbers AT ALL for Rhythm Heaven Fever, making them an easy target), 'cause the funny thing is that Chorus Men aren't even the weakest link in the leak, the veritable hole in the dam.

Right after the Direct, Sal Romano comes onto Smash Boards and answers some pivotal questions. In the interests of making the topic a little more concise and not so long-winded, I'm going to cherry pick some of the stranger responses:

Little Mac, Pac-Man, and Mii Missing E3

I'll be the first to admit, I have no idea. There are literally tons of reasons as to why this person could've thought the trio would appear at E3. But even so, things happen, and not everything always goes according to plan. And Little Mac eventually showed. The guy is still backing Pac-Man and Mii, too. So, much like the rest of the rumor, time will tell there.

Ah, yes, so we've found the Patient Zero of the 'Things happen, that doesn't deconfirm the leak!' virus that Sal Romano/Gematsu Leak supporters love to spread. Sal Romano also admits in this quote that the leaker thought that the missing characters would get confirmed at E3. But Sal Romano, why didn't they show up? "Oh, well, the developing room is an ever-changing landscape!" and then goes on to say "And Little Mac Eventually showed.". Last I checked, January isn't when E3 is, but hey, good try.

Pokemon from X and Y

Again, I don't know. This is what the guy told me, so it's what I posted. I don't know how involved he is in the game's development, or how 'inside' his insder knowledge is. There are, again, tons of reasons as to why he might not have known or been able to say the Pokemon's name. Or even describe him at that. Depending on the guy's involvement, it's possible he was only told about a "Pokemon from X and Y" being in the roster.

"There are, again, tons of reasons as to why he might not have known or been able to say the Pokemon's name. Or even describe him at that."

Lots of reasons! Like he doesn't actually have any information, or a leaker, or the leaker has been under a rock for the past year or so, y'know.. lots of reasons!

No offense, but even before the Greninja reveal I'm fairly certain you could've typed in 'frog pokemon' and Greninja would've popped up fairly early in the image results. Then you could've put two and two together. Heck, Greninja shows up in the image results for 'ninja Pokemon'. So, let's give the leaker some slack on the off chance that the leaker doesn't know search engines exist, or he's afraid Nintendo's legal ninjas are going to disembowel him for dishonoring his family by leaking, or whatever. The incriminating evidence lies in the FIRST LEAK, in which the leaker LISTS SPECIFIC CHARACTERS BY NAME. We can give the leaker a pass on the Animal Crossing Guy, since there's no official name for him, but we still get Mega Man (which, by the way, is friggin' huge and dangerous leak no matter the ease of the guess) and Wii Fit Trainer all listed by name. And, since Sal Romano can say it and get away with it, Little Mac also got listed by name and eventually confirmed.

Safe Guesses

I see this term tossed around a lot. I honestly don't think there's any such thing. There are no safe guesses when it comes to naming a roster. Wii Fit Trainer wasn't a safe guess, as you'll admit, and I don't know how 'likely' (again, this would be a synonym of a safe guess, which doesn't really apply as this newcomer thing can be pretty darn random) Mega Man, Villager, and Little Mac were, but this guy's 4 for 6 on his E3 leaks so far. Which is pretty darn good.

We'll have to agree to disagree, Mr. Romano, because to start, your 'leaker' isn't 4 for 6 on the E3 leaks. Remember, those leaks were for E3 reveals only. Technically, your leaker is 3 for 6. Not spectacular by any standard. As for safe guesses, I'll admit that Wii Fit Trainer is far from a safe guess, but anyone can look up Wii Fit's sales numbers and see that it's one of the top selling franchises that beat out even some of Nintendo's more popular and FAR longer running franchises. That should have been a real good hint, even if it would have been a joke pick for a character. Still, assuming WFT wasn't a safe pick, Mega Man, Little Mac and Villager were, especially in comparison to WFT. There's not a single third party newcomer that could have grabbed even a tiny sliver of the hype that Sonic and Snake's reveals for Brawl did. Mega Man was a logical pick to kick hype into high gear out the gate. Villager is from Animal Crossing, which is an extremely popular series and that's never minding that Sakurai admitted in Brawl the character wouldn't be playable, but I'm assuming we're barrel scraping so much this iteration of Smash that he decided to backpedal on that one. People were predicting Villager and Tom Nook in spite of Sakurai's admission that Villager would never work back during Brawl. Finally, Little Mac had a Punch-Out!! game on Wii that did decently, and Little Mac is a pretty popular character in his own right, at least here in the west.

Making Things Up

Let's get one thing straight, and long-time followers of my site will attest to this. I don't make things up. Not for traffic, not for anything. My site exists to provide game news in the most excellent way possible. I don't fabricate information. I'm just like all of you in this, and I'd be pretty pissed off if anyone did something like that. Again, I'm still not 100 percent on my source, but so far he's in the green with his 'leak.'

Ahh, Mr. Romano, my friend, the proof is in the pudding you've set before us. Let me highlight the incriminating evidence here:

"My site exists to provide game news in the most excellent way possible."

That's an interesting thing to say, 'cause your predictions wouldn't have BEEN news if you hadn't 'predicted' Wii Fit Trainer. Any 'news' you have to give after that is going to be 'news' because you got one wild guess right.

It's fun to discuss, but being dead set on proving these things true or false without further evidence is not really doable at the moment.

There you are, folks, Mr. Sal Romano has left the building with wise words that don't help his case any. Yeah, we can't prove it true or false 'til the game launches, but Gematsu sure can enjoy the clicks that come from the previous leaks, and any future ones that happen to become 'news'. Sorry, but I'm not sold, but hey. If I'm proven wrong, I'm 100% cool with admitting I'm wrong. It'll be interesting to see if Sal Romano and Gematsu will be so humble if it turns out they were full of it, or if they'll make more excuses to save face.

Phew. There. Pretty much all the reasons why I find the leak to be strange.

tl;dr: The Sal Romano/Gematsu leak evolved into an impossible to bust clickbait 'cause of one unlikely pick.

 

[Halfhead]

Of all the characters that Sal has given in his leak, Mega Man, Pac-Man, Mii, Little Mac, Chrom, Shulk, and Palutena are fairly popular, straight-forward choices anyway.

Villager is borderline because of the whole thing with Sakurai's quote dispite an Animal Crossing rep being highly guessed by a lot of people anyway.

And Wii Fit Trainer, Greninja, Chorus Men and the really out there ones.

So, of ALL of Sal's characters, there are only three really crazy characters (only two if you don't count Greninja because of his original wording). Wii Fit Trainer and Greninja are already confirmed meaning that the reveal of Chorus Men is the only thing that can confirm Sal's leak, at least in my opinion.

All other reveals, including Mac's, do not contribute legitimacy toward the leak. They are popular, important, and highly probable in their own right.

 

[Bauske]

Oh @ ChunkyBeef , I'm going to enjoy drinking your tears.

First off, you're acting on two ideas right now:
1) Nintendo never makes mistakes
2) We know the leaker's position

Both of those things are false. Nintendo makes and changes plans all the time. Where's that vitality sensor they showed off? What about the ability to send messages to people on your 3DS friends list? Plans change and things don't always follow a strict schedule, even in a big professional company like Nintendo. And secondly, we don't know the leaker's position. I've said this before and I'll say it again. We don't know how connected the leaker is or what role he even plays in this project. He could be someone working close to Sakurai, or he could be someone who is getting info from his uncle who works at Nintendo. We don't know. Sal's leaker may not even work at Nintendo or Namco, but instead is getting their info word of mouth when they can.

That said, I'd like to point out two things. For starters, Wii Fit Trainer was NOT A LUCKY GUESS. Ask anyone on the boards from before last E3. No one would have even thought of her as a possible choice, even jokingly. She was not popular, she wasn't even unpopular. She wasn't even thought of. That's what made people turn their heads at Sal's "prediction." And as has been stated before, Sal made that post on that forum instead of saying "HAY GUIES I GOTA LEAK HERE IT IZ" because even he didn't trust the leaker. He got the information prior to E3, but didn't want to post about it on Gematsu because he was pretty sure it was just a load of boloney, so he made a forum post. It wasn't until after he saw that half of it was right, especially the Wii Fit Trainer part, that he thought the leaker might be legit.

You claim it's click bait or that Sal is just making it up based off a lucky guess in order to get hits to his site. While that could be the case, I'd like to give Sal the benefit of the doubt and trust him on this one because doing any of the things you've made it out like he's doing it just asking for an enormous amount of backlash from fans. Sal is a respected member of a gaming news site, and doing something like making up leaks just to generate hits does not seem like something he would do. Would you do the same if you were in his shoes? Sal isn't a villain or a conniving individual. He's a gamer reporting gaming news.

Secondly, and this is the bigger one, I'd like to point out something I don't think has been mentioned, or at least mentioned for a long while: The initial leak may have been a full list of options. What I mean by that is perhaps when the leaker revealed his information to Sal, it had not yet been decided who was going to show up at E3, but instead they had a list of characters they were planning to reveal. Does this mean all six were going to be revealed? Hardly. It makes even more sense when you think about the characters themselves. They probably only planned to reveal three characters at E3, but hadn't fully figured out which ones to choose, and that's where the original six gets interesting to me. Think about it:

Third party characters: Mega Man or Pac-Man
Avatar-style characters: Villager or Mii
Sporty-type characters: Wii Fit Trainer or Little Mac

To me, it looks like the characters on the initial leak were broken down into three categories and the team was deciding who would generate the most buzz at the gaming convention. There's no doubt that Mega Man generated more hype than Pac-Man ever would (as much as I love him). The next decision came down to something expected and something unexpected. I think they wanted a sort of silly character and another fan favorite to generate even more hype. This means the choice would have to be either Villager and Wii Fit Trainer or Little Mac and the Mii. Revealing both Mii and Wii Fit Trainer would have generated a lot of groans from fans, I think. People have come to appreciate Wii Fit Trainer now, but back when she was revealed, many people hated her. Imagine the amount of rage on these forums if both Miis and Wii Fit Trainer were revealed back at E3 rather than Villager.

This is all speculation on my part, but it makes sense to me. Again, we don't know the leaker's role in this whole thing, or even when he got his information. It could have been a month before E3, when they were still planning, or it could have been several months. We don't know, but the fact of the matter is that he hasn't been wrong yet. Being vague does NOT equate to being wrong. People act as though, if he were legit, he'd have no right to be vague at all, as though we know specifically what his job is. We don't know why he was vague and more than likely we'll never know, but to assume he's wrong because he was vague about "Pokemon from X and Y" is the same thing as assuming all other leakers are right when they name every single character on their "leak" in complete detail. And where are all those leaks now?

My main point is you're looking at everything in a negative light and with a lot of skepticism, which isn't necessarily bad, but I think you're taking your negative thoughts and using them as facts. Do I think the leak is 100% true? No, not at all. I'd say I have about 80% faith in it, as it has not been wrong yet, but there's always room for doubt, so long as doubt isn't the only thing that exists. Again, Sal's leaker has not be wrong yet. Could he be wrong in the future? Possibly, but until that time, we can't go saying he's lying because we have no proof of it other than baseless conjecture.

 

[shrooby]

My main point is you're looking at everything in a negative light and with a lot of skepticism, which isn't necessarily bad, but I think you're taking your negative thoughts and using them as facts. Do I think the leak is 100% true? No, not at all. I'd say I have about 80% faith in it, as it has not been wrong yet, but there's always room for doubt, so long as doubt isn't the only thing that exists. Again, Sal's leaker has not be wrong yet. Could he be wrong in the future? Possibly, but until that time, we can't go saying he's lying because we have no proof of it other than baseless conjecture.

Please note that despite what I'm about to type I do actually have some faith in this "leak."
But you're wrong. Sal's leaker was wrong. The leak was not "three of these six will be shown" or something that implies that possibly not all of the characters would be shown. Little Mac, Miis, and Pac-Man were not shown at E3. Whether or not they're in the game is irrelevant in this context because that wasn't what the leak stated. Even if Pac-Man and Miis end up being in the game Sal's leaker still would've been wrong because they weren't shown at E3 2013.
The first leak was three-for-six and it always will be.
Not that it means anything for whether or not the characters are actually in the game at all, but it's important to know that the leaker was wrong. Well, half wrong.
Now, of course, we can make explanations in hindsight that make complete sense as to why the leak could've been half right and half wrong, but that doesn't change the fact the first leak was wrong. Half wrong, but still wrong.
It really is just semantics, I know, but I'm picky.

 

[TeenGirlSquad]

Whether or not the leak was technically wrong, what matters is that the leaker clearly has inside information.

 

[Noiblade]

Whether or not the leak was technically wrong, what matters is that the leaker clearly has inside information.

Yes, I've said it once and i'll say it again.
The fact that he "predicted"/"leaked" 2 extremely unlikely and hard to guess characters, Plus another character for one event, is almost impossible.
I don't know if the newer stuff is fake or not, but i'm 99% he had some insider knowledge.

 

[shrooby]

Whether or not the leak was technically wrong, what matters is that the leaker clearly has inside information.

Oh, yeah, I'm aware.
I'm just a jerk.

It's just that it is incorrect to say that the leaker has not been wrong, so don't claim that.
Regardless, that doesn't diminish his credibility a significant amount in my opinion. But I'll acknowledge that he was wrong.

It's like missing a few questions on a test, but the ones you did get right were worth most of the points.
You got things wrong, but you still got a good grade. But to say that you got a 100% would be false.

 

[Bauske]

Please note that despite what I'm about to type I do actually have some faith in this "leak."
But you're wrong. Sal's leaker was wrong. The leak was not "three of these six will be shown" or something that implies that possibly not all of the characters would be shown. Little Mac, Miis, and Pac-Man were not shown at E3. Whether or not they're in the game is irrelevant in this context because that wasn't what the leak stated. Even if Pac-Man and Miis end up being in the game Sal's leaker still would've been wrong because they weren't shown at E3 2013.
The first leak was three-for-six and it always will be.
Not that it means anything for whether or not the characters are actually in the game at all, but it's important to know that the leaker was wrong. Well, half wrong.
Now, of course, we can make explanations in hindsight that make complete sense as to why the leak could've been half right and half wrong, but that doesn't change the fact the first leak was wrong. Half wrong, but still wrong.
It really is just semantics, I know, but I'm picky.

But how do you know that? Have you seen the exact email that the leaker sent to Sal? If so, I'd like to see it. Did the leaker specifically say "all six characters listed here will show up at E3"? As far as I know, the leaker never specified that all the characters would be present at E3. I may be wrong, and if so, I would be happy to see proof of that.

I'm not trying to be a jerk either, just saying we're putting self-created rules on something that never had them to begin with. As far as I'm concerned, unless the leaker specifically stated those six characters would be revealed at E3, he's still not wrong. He gave us a list of characters that are in the game and which might appear at E3, and he got three right.

 

[EmbersToAshes]

Oh, yeah, I'm aware.
I'm just a jerk.

It's just that it is incorrect to say that the leaker has not been wrong, so don't claim that.
Regardless, that doesn't diminish his credibility a significant amount in my opinion. But I'll acknowledge that he was wrong.

It's like missing a few questions on a test, but the ones you did get right were worth most of the points.
You got things wrong, but you still got a good grade. But to say that you got a 100% would be false.

That's not strictly true. The leaker has not been wrong on any details that by now are locked in 100%. Getting the number of characters announced at E3 wrong is a different matter - conference plans and announcements are likely in flux for weeks beforehand and are far more changeable than the game itself. Depending on the source's distance from the game (considering that both of his leaks have been around events) it's perfectly believable that he received details on E3 before the plans were solidified. However, so far, he hasn't had a single character disconfirmed. He's nailed 5 in a row, which is odds of over 55,000. And then we have to consider that one of those characters was a complete bolt from the blue. I think it's fair to say that he hasn't been wrong yet, when the only detail that didn't come to pass is by nature an event that's plans can change multiple times. The characters, which we know are locked by now, he hasn't failed on.

 

[ChunkyBeef]

Oh @ ChunkyBeef , I'm going to enjoy drinking your tears.

You won't be drinking my tears, 'cause I could honestly care less. All I was pointing out was that we got one of those neat 500 piece puzzles that depicts a bridge, and we're missing a lot of the pieces, and some of them don't really match up where they should. I'm not trying to convince anyone. If I was, I'd have done way more research. All I'm saying is, 'Hey, this is cool, but there's something that's not quite right here.'. That doesn't necessarily make me negative, or looking at the leak in a negative light. I don't care, 'cause I'm going to buy the game, both of them, regardless of the final roster.

That said, I'd like to point out two things. For starters, Wii Fit Trainer was NOT A LUCKY GUESS.

If no-one guessed her, but he did, that's a lucky guess. It doesn't matter if no-one predicted her before, 'cause it only takes one guess. It's like playing the lottery. Who cares if no-one picks the right numbers? All it takes is one guy to pick the right numbers to win. Sal Romano was lucky.

He got the information prior to E3, but didn't want to post about it on Gematsu because he was pretty sure it was just a load of boloney, so he made a forum post. It wasn't until after he saw that half of it was right, especially the Wii Fit Trainer part, that he thought the leaker might be legit.

Yeah, but if Sal Romano had come out and said, 'I got a message from someone about what we might see at E3, here it is:' we wouldn't be having this discussion. Again, he said:

"My unlikely predictions: Little Mac, Pac-Man, Animal Crossing Guy, Mega Man, Wii Fit Trainer, Mii."

Can't we all agree that right there's kinda shady all on its lonesome? Where there's smoke, there's fire, y'know?

You claim it's click bait or that Sal is just making it up based off a lucky guess in order to get hits to his site. While that could be the case, I'd like to give Sal the benefit of the doubt and trust him on this one because doing any of the things you've made it out like he's doing it just asking for an enormous amount of backlash from fans.

Like I said, it wasn't news 'til Sal made it news, but that's besides the point. I'd love to give Sal the benefit of the doubt, but when things don't line up, and no-one's paying attention to that, something's gotta be said. And what enormous backlash from fans? Even if at this point he's hilariously wrong with the leaks, people are just going to make excuses as to why he was wrong, anyway, so any backlash, if ANY AT ALL, will be from a vocal minority and he'll still be keeping most of his new members.

Secondly, and this is the bigger one, I'd like to point out something I don't think has been mentioned, or at least mentioned for a long while: The initial leak may have been a full list of options.

I think you're a cool guy, Bauske, so don't take offense to this.. but you're making excuses here. The only options that existed were the ones that existed when they were making the trailers. Nintendo/Bamco aren't so hilariously disorganized that they'd be running around like a Benny Hill montage before E3 wondering what to show off there. Though as I imagine it, it sounds hilarious.

To me, it looks like the characters on the initial leak were broken down into three categories and the team was deciding who would generate the most buzz at the gaming convention.

It couldn't have been a hard choice. 'Let's pick the character I said we weren't doing, and the one third party character that would make the internet explode. And as a bonus, let's show off our joke character now so we can get the bullcrap out of the way now.'

This is all speculation on my part, but it makes sense to me. Again, we don't know the leaker's role in this whole thing, or even when he got his information.

Or if there's even a leaker. Anyone can say they've got an inside source, doesn't really make it true. Talk is cheap. Evidence convinces people.

It could have been a month before E3, when they were still planning, or it could have been several months. We don't know, but the fact of the matter is that he hasn't been wrong yet. Being vague does NOT equate to being wrong.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree here, 'cause the X/Y Pokemon guess is such a vague and safe pick that OF COURSE it's right. It's probably the safest pick on both lists, honestly, simply 'cause of how vague it is.

People act as though, if he were legit, he'd have no right to be vague at all, as though we know specifically what his job is. We don't know why he was vague and more than likely we'll never know, but to assume he's wrong because he was vague about "Pokemon from X and Y" is the same thing as assuming all other leakers are right when they name every single character on their "leak" in complete detail. And where are all those leaks now?

Heh. Consistency is a major thing to me. The fact that he labels pretty much every other character on his lists, but suddenl goes 'OH THAT ONE GUY FROM POKEMON IS IN THERE' is just one of those weird pieces of the puzzle that don't fit. I'm willing to let the Villager/Animal Crossing Guy thing pass 'cause, as I said, there's no real name for the guy.

My main point is you're looking at everything in a negative light and with a lot of skepticism, which isn't necessarily bad, but I think you're taking your negative thoughts and using them as facts.

So, by questioning these things and giving evidence, I'm thinking negative thoughts and using them as facts? At the worst, all I wind up saying is that these things are all good reasons to have a healthy skepticism of the Sal Romano leak.

Possibly, but until that time, we can't go saying he's lying because we have no proof of it other than baseless conjecture.

It's fun to discuss, but being dead set on proving these things true or false without further evidence is not really doable at the moment.

You sound like Sal Romano there.

tl;dr: Keep a healthy skepticism of the Sal Romano leak; a lot of things don't line up right, and if it sounds too good to be true, it usually is.

 

[TeenGirlSquad]

and if it sounds too good to be true, it usually is.

I was under the impression that the leak was actually disappointing to many people.

 

[Morbi]

I was under the impression that the leak was actually disappointing to many people.

I was under the very same impression. I thought that most people were asserting that it wasn't credible BECAUSE it had characters they didn't like on it. Personally, it would bother me if Pac-Man, Mii, and Chorus Men all made it into the game. I can only take so much.

 

[HVDooD]

Lets combine MK8 leaker with this one:
48 characters and 4 cuts from Brawl, Sal Romano leak claims 12 newcomers so: 39 - 4 = 35 + 12 = 47
Looks incorrect or someone from Melee is coming back someone very overrated...

 

[EmbersToAshes]

Lets combine MK8 leaker with this one:
48 characters and 4 cuts from Brawl, Sal Romano leak claims 12 newcomers so: 39 - 4 = 35 + 12 = 47
Looks incorrect or someone from Melee is coming back someone very overrated...

You forgot Rosalina. She came between Sal's Leaks and wasn't included. That makes 48.

Edit: I don't particularly put any faith in RosalinaX's leak, mind. Just saying that so far it does tally with Sal's.

 

[Sucumbio]

hm, now that I've actually read the original leaks, and sal's posts on these boards and on ours, I am now more convinced than ever he's not just making these things up on his own. the leaker may even be a strategically placed employee of Nintendo.

@ ChunkyBeef you're nit picking his words, trying to argue a huge point and at the same time using the timeline against him when in fact it's the timeline that saves him. "My predictions" is a safe way to post someone else's words without leading everyone on. If at that point his post turned out to be all wrong, he'd just be another user who got stuff wrong (and therefore he'd know for certain his source was bunk). BUT because his source got 3/6 (and again it's semantics to argue for 4/6) then I'm sure he felt more comfortable talking about everything in a light that painted the picture of "I have a source giving me this info" because it's turned out to be credible.

In other words if someone claiming to be from Nintendo called me right this minute, and assuming I run a Video Game News Site, to tell me "hey guess what, the following characters will be revealed at e3, and e3 is right around the corner, what do I do? Do I sit on it for my own personal amusement. Do I vet the source as best as I can in the time allotted and then share the info publicly? It's a tough decision, really. But he made his decision, and as it turns out, he's been right ever since.

And just so we understand, predicting GRENINJA as a playable character and predicting some pokemon x/y character will be in the game is really the same thing when you consider just how much rep pokemon x/y is getting in this new game. All this speaks to is the level of involvement the leaker has on actual game development. It doesn't discredit the source's accuracy and thereby extension Sal's accuracy.

 

[TeenGirlSquad]

You forgot Rosalina. She came between Sal's Leaks and wasn't included. That makes 48.

Edit: I don't particularly put any faith in RosalinaX's leak, mind. Just saying that so far it does tally with Sal's.

No, they're counting Rosalina. Technically, Sal has only leaked eleven characters.

 

[HVDooD]

You forgot Rosalina. She came between Sal's Leaks and wasn't included. That makes 48.

Edit: I don't particularly put any faith in RosalinaX's leak, mind. Just saying that so far it does tally with Sal's.

I diddn't cause Sal only mentioned 11 newcomers and i counted 12 with Rosalina cause the leaker might have seen her as a Peach skin.

 

[ChunkyBeef]

I was under the impression that the leak was actually disappointing to many people.

That's pretty much the basest piece of evidence I have for the leak being legitimate. I just like to look at both sides of the coin.

 

[CyberWolfBia]

Lets combine MK8 leaker with this one:
48 characters and 4 cuts from Brawl, Sal Romano leak claims 12 newcomers so: 39 - 4 = 35 + 12 = 47
Looks incorrect or someone from Melee is coming back someone very overrated...

I'm hoping for Mewtwo, but not expecting him, really. ...yeah, I don't really believe anybody returning from Melee... Well, the Sal's leak still has more credibility.

 

[EmbersToAshes]

hm, now that I've actually read the original leaks, and sal's posts on these boards and on ours, I am now more convinced than ever he's not just making these things up on his own. the leaker may even be a strategically placed employee of Nintendo.

@ ChunkyBeef you're nit picking his words, trying to argue a huge point and at the same time using the timeline against him when in fact it's the timeline that saves him. "My predictions" is a safe way to post someone else's words without leading everyone on. If at that point his post turned out to be all wrong, he'd just be another user who got stuff wrong (and therefore he'd know for certain his source was bunk). BUT because his source got 3/6 (and again it's semantics to argue for 4/6) then I'm sure he felt more comfortable talking about everything in a light that painted the picture of "I have a source giving me this info" because it's turned out to be credible.

In other words if someone claiming to be from Nintendo called me right this minute, and assuming I run a Video Game News Site, to tell me "hey guess what, the following characters will be revealed at e3, and e3 is right around the corner, what do I do? Do I sit on it for my own personal amusement. Do I vet the source as best as I can in the time allotted and then share the info publicly? It's a tough decision, really. But he made his decision, and as it turns out, he's been right ever since.

And just so we understand, predicting GRENINJA as a playable character and predicting some pokemon x/y character will be in the game is really the same thing when you consider just how much rep pokemon x/y is getting in this new game. All this speaks to is the level of involvement the leaker has on actual game development. It doesn't discredit the source's accuracy and thereby extension Sal's accuracy.

With regards to Pokemon from X/Y, I think this supports the assumption that the source works in PR surrounding Nintendo Smash media events more than anything else. You'd have to assume that Nintendo would be trying their hardest to avoid the information leaking - I'd be referring to my characters in as vague a terms as possible. If this guy just happens to be in the right place at the right time at these events, then I could understand him only having a vague grasp on which pokemon would be featured. This is pure speculation, of course, but considering how many characters he's now got right and how unlikely it is he'd nail so many, it's more believable than the possibility that the guy is screwing with us, in my opinion.

@ HVDooD : My mistake, apologies.

 

[shrooby]

But how do you know that? Have you seen the exact email that the leaker sent to Sal? If so, I'd like to see it. Did the leaker specifically say "all six characters listed here will show up at E3"? As far as I know, the leaker never specified that all the characters would be present at E3. I may be wrong, and if so, I would be happy to see proof of that.

I'm not trying to be a jerk either, just saying we're putting self-created rules on something that never had them to begin with. As far as I'm concerned, unless the leaker specifically stated those six characters would be revealed at E3, he's still not wrong. He gave us a list of characters that are in the game and which might appear at E3, and he got three right.

I'll admit, it's only implications I'm going by. But I like to think its a logical implication.

Little Mac, Pac-Man, and Mii Missing E3

I'll be the first to admit, I have no idea. There are literally tons of reasons as to why this person could've thought the trio would appear at E3. But even so, things happen, and not everything always goes according to plan. And Little Mac eventually showed. The guy is still backing Pac-Man and Mii, too. So, much like the rest of the rumor, time will tell there.

Sal attempting to justify why the three didn't appear at E3 would imply that the leaker stated they would be.
If the leak said that "some of these characters will be shown at E3," or something like that, then Sal would say so as a means of justification for them not being shown. (Well, I would at least...)
I'm not sure if I'm being that concise, so I'll state that differently.
If the leaker did indeed say to Sal that a subset of this list of six characters would be shown, then Sal wouldn't need come up with hindsight justification as to why some of them weren't shown. But the fact that Sal is saying this would imply that the leaker said that all six would be shown, and not just some of them.

That's not strictly true. The leaker has not been wrong on any details that by now are locked in 100%. Getting the number of characters announced at E3 wrong is a different matter - conference plans and announcements are likely in flux for weeks beforehand and are far more changeable than the game itself. Depending on the source's distance from the game (considering that both of his leaks have been around events) it's perfectly believable that he received details on E3 before the plans were solidified. However, so far, he hasn't had a single character disconfirmed. He's nailed 5 in a row, which is odds of over 55,000. And then we have to consider that one of those characters was a complete bolt from the blue. I think it's fair to say that he hasn't been wrong yet, when the only detail that didn't come to pass is by nature an event that's plans can change multiple times. The characters, which we know are locked by now, he hasn't failed on.

Yes, I'm aware that it doesn't mean that the characters aren't in the game at all. That's not my point.
I think you're explanation as to why Pac Man, Little Mac and Mii weren't shown at E3 makes perfect sense. I'm not trying to imply that it does not. Like I said, I do have some faith in this leak.
However, Sal seems to imply that the leaker told him that six characters would be shown at E3. We only got three. So, hindsight justification aside, what the leaker told Sal was wrong. Not about the characters necessarily, I'm aware, but they weren't revealed when he (I'm assuming) said they were going to be.
My only point is that claiming the leaker wasn't wrong at all is in itself wrong. Again, not about the character themselves, which is a different matter, but he was wrong about them being revealed at E3. No amount of justification as to why he was (half-) wrong can change the fact that he was (half-) wrong.

 

[CyberWolfBia]

I was under the impression that the leak was actually disappointing to many people.

I dunno... if is good for the game, and its variety; be on gameplay wise or representation wise (man, Rhythm Heaven getting a playable character is an awesome possibility), it should be good for everyone.

People may be disappointed 'cause their favorite character was unable to reach the roster, but, as I did with Brawl, just needs a better point of view.

 

[TeenGirlSquad]

I dunno... if is good for the game, and its variety; be on gameplay wise or representation wise (man, Rhythm Heaven getting a playable character is an awesome possibility), it should be good for everyone.

People may be disappointed 'cause their favorite character was unable to reach the roster, but, as I did with Brawl, just needs a better point of view.

Well, I sincerely doubt this is the full roster.

 

[CyberWolfBia]

Well, I sincerely doubt this is the full roster.

Brawl veterans + 11 Newcomers (excluding Rosalina)?, Well, I think that's good; regardless of who are the characters; but seeing how Rosalina wasn't in the Sal's leak, maybe we still can get some others newcomers besides Chrom, Pac, Mii, Chorus Kids, Palutena and Shulk. Let's just hope; but I can say that I'm satisfied.

 

[ChunkyBeef]

you're nit picking his words, trying to argue a huge point and at the same time using the timeline against him when in fact it's the timeline that saves him. "My predictions" is a safe way to post someone else's words without leading everyone on. If at that point his post turned out to be all wrong, he'd just be another user who got stuff wrong (and therefore he'd know for certain his source was bunk). BUT because his source got 3/6 (and again it's semantics to argue for 4/6) then I'm sure he felt more comfortable talking about everything in a light that painted the picture of "I have a source giving me this info" because it's turned out to be credible.

I'm nit picking his words because that's where the evidence is. If it wasn't for the fact that this happens several times, I'd not even be here.

I'm even willing to go so far as to say that he could have been vague with his post - "I've been hearing around that these might be at E3." - and we'd not be having this discussion. You're seeing the forest for the trees. I'm seeing the forest for the fauna.

In other words if someone claiming to be from Nintendo called me right this minute, and assuming I run a Video Game News Site, to tell me "hey guess what, the following characters will be revealed at e3, and e3 is right around the corner, what do I do? Do I sit on it for my own personal amusement. Do I vet the source as best as I can in the time allotted and then share the info publicly?

That's an excellent question, but you don't run an gaming news website that could benefit from being the forerunner of a leak, either. So it's anyone's guess.

And just so we understand, predicting GRENINJA as a playable character and predicting some pokemon x/y character will be in the game is really the same thing when you consider just how much rep pokemon x/y is getting in this new game. All this speaks to is the level of involvement the leaker has on actual game development. It doesn't discredit the source's accuracy and thereby extension Sal's accuracy.

It discredits the source's accuracy when he labels every single other character by name, but somehow struggles with the name of a Pokemon he should feasibly have access to if he knows the names of every other character he's leaked.

 

[Bauske]

Well now! We've got some discussion going. I like this. :D

If no-one guessed her, but he did, that's a lucky guess. It doesn't matter if no-one predicted her before, 'cause it only takes one guess. It's like playing the lottery. Who cares if no-one picks the right numbers? All it takes is one guy to pick the right numbers to win. Sal Romano was lucky.

I can agree with this to some extent, but the fact that he got her and two others that were revealed is still pretty impressive. No one else predicted that. Sure we can look at it as a lucky guess, but we can also look at it as correct information from a leak. At this point, it's hard to say.

Can't we all agree that right there's kinda shady all on its lonesome? Where there's smoke, there's fire, y'know.

No, I don't see it as shady. I'm sure Sal gets leaks like this sent to him on a regular basis, many of which probably come from people just making crap up. But I think @ Sucumbio stated it best:

"'My predictions' is a safe way to post someone else's words without leading everyone on. If at that point his post turned out to be all wrong, he'd just be another user who got stuff wrong (and therefore he'd know for certain his source was bunk). BUT because his source got 3/6 (and again it's semantics to argue for 4/6) then I'm sure he felt more comfortable talking about everything in a light that painted the picture of 'I have a source giving me this info' because it's turned out to be credible."

Sal wasn't really claiming HE was predicting things. He was stating "my predictions" as a way of saving his butt in case they were wrong. Had he just taken the leaker's info straight up as true and posted it to Gematsu without a second thought, then it turned out wrong, people would have been pretty upset I think. Then again, had he done so and the leaker was correct, we wouldn't be having this conversation. I don't see it as shady at all. I see it as him testing the waters to see if this leaker was full of crap or not.

I think you're a cool guy, Bauske, so don't take offense to this.. but you're making excuses here. The only options that existed were the ones that existed when they were making the trailers. Nintendo/Bamco aren't so hilariously disorganized that they'd be running around like a Benny Hill montage before E3 wondering what to show off there. Though as I imagine it, it sounds hilarious.

Nah, I don't take offense. You're making your points and I'm making mine. It's fun discussion. I like this. But, having worked in news industries and even sort of in the video game industry, plus knowing people who do or used to work in the gaming industry (two of my friends work/worked at IGN), I know things can change on the fly. Maybe they've had the trailers done for Pac-Man, Mii, and Little Mac done since last year. If you watch Little Mac's trailer, the only character that's in it that wasn't revealed at E3 is Dedede, and it's just a short segment of video that could easily be replaced. Lucario, Zelda, Rosalina, Marth, Sonic, Toon Link, all these characters were revealed before Little Mac, and yet none of them are in Little Mac's trailer, and even when you consider the non-game footage of the trailer itself, the only character that's present other than him is Samus. It IS possible his trailer was completed last year before E3 and just wasn't used until his reveal.

Things in the gaming industry do change, and although there often isn't any Benny Hill music running in the background, sometimes preparing for a huge event like E3 can be just as hectic.

Or if there's even a leaker. Anyone can say they've got an inside source, doesn't really make it true. Talk is cheap. Evidence convinces people.

I agree, but unfortunately, the only evidence that we have is what Sal's leaker has stated. The stuff you're coming up with, much like the stuff I'm coming up with, isn't really evidence against or for the leak. It's all speculation and reading into stuff.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree here, 'cause the X/Y Pokemon guess is such a vague and safe pick that OF COURSE it's right. It's probably the safest pick on both lists, honestly, simply 'cause of how vague it is.

Or, as others and myself have stated before, maybe his info was outdated and he really didn't know. He just knew a Pokemon from X/Y was going to fill a slot but when he got his info, it hadn't been decided which yet. I'm sure they finalized a basic roster as early as last year. Stuff like that doesn't just happen on the fly.

So, by questioning these things and giving evidence, I'm thinking negative thoughts and using them as facts? At the worst, all I wind up saying is that these things are all good reasons to have a healthy skepticism of the Sal Romano leak.

I'm just saying the stuff you're using isn't evidence, much like the stuff I'm saying isn't evidence. It's just us coming up with theories because we don't know the full story. You can read into the word "MY" or "predictions" or anything else how you want to, but the fact of the matter is neither of us know the full story or know who the leaker is. I agree there's always room for skepticism. I do try to look at all points presented when, although I will admit I generally like to give people the benefit of the doubt, especially when they haven't been wrong. I've seen some pretty BS leaks when the Leaks and Rumors thread was up, and most of them you could just throw away because of how much doubt they left. Very few stayed open and continued discussion because very few were believable. And now the Gematsu leak and RosalinaX leak are the only two that are really left to us. They've stayed alive through everything either by vagueness or lack of info, but regardless they're still alive, and after everything we've seen, I think that gives them reason to be believable.

 

[shrooby]

Nah, I don't take offense. You're making your points and I'm making mine. It's fun discussion. I like this. But, having worked in news industries and even sort of in the video game industry, plus knowing people who do or used to work in the gaming industry (two of my friends work/worked at IGN), I know things can change on the fly. Maybe they've had the trailers done for Pac-Man, Mii, and Little Mac done since last year. If you watch Little Mac's trailer, the only character that's in it that wasn't revealed at E3 is Dedede, and it's just a short segment of video that could easily be replaced. Lucario, Zelda, Rosalina, Marth, Sonic, Toon Link, all these characters were revealed before Little Mac, and yet none of them are in Little Mac's trailer, and even when you consider the non-game footage of the trailer itself, the only character that's present other than him is Samus. It IS possible his trailer was completed last year before E3 and just wasn't used until his reveal.

Just so that you know, Marth was in Mac's trailer. And if we're just talking about stuff revealed after E3, Garden of Hope and Pyrosphere were also shown.

 

[Sucumbio]

That's an excellent question, but you don't run an gaming news website that could benefit from being the forerunner of a leak, either. So it's anyone's guess.

Wait, what? You DO do that if you're in the field of journalism... it's called "breaking a story." If we're to look at it this way, Sal broke the story on Smash4's newcomers. He had a source, he tested it, it panned out, he went with it. I see no conflict of interest in what he did, I'd have done the same.

It discredits the source's accuracy when he labels every single other character by name, but somehow struggles with the name of a Pokemon he should feasibly have access to if he knows the names of every other character he's leaked.

This is a bit... absolute don't you think? He was unable or unwilling to name one of the picks so it means his credibility is called into question? I mean, he could have said "A character from a popular Capcom game, a character from a popular boxing game, a character from a fitness game" and so forth, but he didn't. He named everyone but greninja, and we have no idea why. It doesn't mean I'm immediately going to assume the reason why was because he must have been making it all up, or just making lucky guesses. This is where people are assuming you to just be a negative nancy, because of the way in which you've interpreted these results. I tend to think it could be any of a number of scenarios:

maybe he just couldn't say
maybe he really didn't know the difference between x/y assist trophies, trophies, stage characters, playable characters, etc. Like I said x/y is getting huge, almost unbalance rep in this game, yeah? is it so hard to give the leaker the benefit of the doubt?
maybe there are more than one pokemon x/y playable characters, and he wasn't sure which on would be at e3!

THEN we have the "well not all were revealed at e3."

Okay, fair enough. Perhaps originally they decided that they'd reveal 3 of the 6 or heck even 4 of 10, but needed to wait until the e3 crew had assembled their projects, their presentations rather, as to which of the total they'd ultimately go for, and it turns out that only 3 were ready for the public. I can buy this a lot more than Sal's just making up the source as an excuse to cover his tail should he be wrong at any point. Having a backup plan is always key. Backups for backups, -especially- a deal like e3 where the whole world is literally watching. If you're Nintendo, or hell, anyone that's presenting, you're going to make darn sure you've got all your slots ready to fill, all your presentations ready to go, even if you only have time enough for 1/2 of them. That way, if something goes horribly awry, you're not left in lurch, scrambling for some way to fill 15 minutes of awkward silence.

Course if it was me I'd just say "hey Mr. Sakurai, let's just play smash for 15 minutes, that's all the reveal we need." But I'm a dreamer :D

 

[PlTe]

There are some people who believe that every leak they see is immediately fake, due to people believing that no one could know the insider info. But if I'm correct, weren't there a few Pokemon X and Y leaks that were proven true? I know there was one that leaked Pangoro, Inkay, Malamar, Espurr, Meowstick, the starter evo types (they had it right but then said it was actually Grass/Dark and Water/Fighting, still though), and some other tidbits. There was another I believe that leaked Fairy-type and its weaknesses. No one really believed these because they were text leaks, and we didn't really get a lot of picture leaks.
Though this is a completely different game, we should still be open-minded about the fact that this leak has a lot of legitimacy.

 

[Bauske]

Just so that you know, Marth was in Mac's trailer. And if we're just talking about stuff revealed after E3, Garden of Hope and Pyrosphere were also shown.

Good points! But again I stand by the fact that those are all in-game scenes that could easily be replaced. If you look at the cinematics themselves, even in the Rosalina and Charizard/Greninja trailers, no one except standard characters (and Luigi in Rosalina's, but c'mon, who's gonna think he wouldn't be in the game) show up. There's no Lucario, no Zelda, no Dedede, nothing. They're usually always Mario, Link, Kirby, and one or two of the other characters that were revealed when the game was revealed back at E3. They probably have had most of these cinematic launch trailers done for quite a while now, just waiting to be used for whenever they choose to reveal a character. The rest can be filled with gameplay footage, which they can take at any time, but putting together a cinematic like that takes a lot more work and time.

Just a thought. I highly doubt they made the Rosalina cinematic just a week or month before she got revealed. They were probably sitting on it for a few months.

 

[ChunkyBeef]

Well now! We've got some discussion going. I like this. :D

Yes indeed. Can't argue here. You bring up some good points, so I'm going to cherry pick a little here. Or a lot.

I agree, but unfortunately, the only evidence that we have is what Sal's leaker has stated. The stuff you're coming up with, much like the stuff I'm coming up with, isn't really evidence against or for the leak. It's all speculation and reading into stuff.

Certainly, but Sal Romano is the only guy withholding the evidence here. All it takes is some proof, or a Chorus Men reveal, to get me to admit I was wrong, y'know?

Or, as others and myself have stated before, maybe his info was outdated and he really didn't know. He just knew a Pokemon from X/Y was going to fill a slot but when he got his info, it hadn't been decided which yet. I'm sure they finalized a basic roster as early as last year. Stuff like that doesn't just happen on the fly.

I'd imagine they finalized the roster long before last year, but that's another argument for another time and topic. If we're talking last year, they were probably starting to figure out who WASN'T going to make the cut at that point. I'm just not convinced that the circumstances were that simple, y'know? If you knew there was an X/Y Pokemon in there, chances are you knew what one it was already. Just most of the conventional arguments in favor of the leaker don't make a lick of sense to me.

I agree there's always room for skepticism. I do try to look at all points presented when, although I will admit I generally like to give people the benefit of the doubt, especially when they haven't been wrong. I've seen some pretty BS leaks when the Leaks and Rumors thread was up, and most of them you could just throw away because of how much doubt they left. Very few stayed open and continued discussion because very few were believable. And now the Gematsu leak and RosalinaX leak are the only two that are really left to us. They've stayed alive through everything either by vagueness or lack of info, but regardless they're still alive, and after everything we've seen, I think that gives them reason to be believable.

I'm the same way. As I said, I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt but, at the same time, I'm not exactly going to trust people 100%, not especially when the evidence for it has inconsistencies and other questionable stuff.

Wait, what? You DO do that if you're in the field of journalism... it's called "breaking a story." If we're to look at it this way, Sal broke the story on Smash4's newcomers. He had a source, he tested it, it panned out, he went with it. I see no conflict of interest in what he did, I'd have done the same.

And as I've said before, like, four or five times already, it didn't become a story 'til Sal Romano MADE IT a story. If he hadn't said anything about it on Gematsu, it have wafted on by in the breeze completely ignored, like every other leak before it.

If I were in the field of journalism and I made a wild guess on something huge that turned out to be right, I'd probably have done the same, especially if it benefited my up-and-coming gaming news website. The fact that it's questionable is the problem.

This is a bit... absolute don't you think? He was unable or unwilling to name one of the picks so it means his credibility is called into question? I mean, he could have said "A character from a popular Capcom game, a character from a popular boxing game, a character from a fitness game" and so forth, but he didn't. He named everyone but greninja, and we have no idea why. It doesn't mean I'm immediately going to assume the reason why was because he must have been making it all up, or just making lucky guesses. This is where people are assuming you to just be a negative nancy, because of the way in which you've interpreted these results. I tend to think it could be any of a number of scenarios:

Yeah, we can come up with 'what ifs' and 'maybes' all day, but I'm not pointing to it as an absolute. As I said already, consistency is a big thing for me, and the fact that the information is vague and inconsistent grabs me as suspicious. I'm not saying 'THIS IS THE SINGLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT THIS LEAK IS FAKE', I'm saying 'This is a piece of the puzzle that doesn't fit right.'. I'm interpreting these inconsistencies together as a greater piece of the puzzle that tells me that things aren't as black and white as they seem at first glance.

Course if it was me I'd just say "hey Mr. Sakurai, let's just play smash for 15 minutes, that's all the reveal we need." But I'm a dreamer :D

Aren't we all dreamers?

Anyway, I've argued both FOR the leak and AGAINST the leak. There just feels, to me, like there's more evidence against the leak than for it. I've already outlined the ways to get me to admit I'm wrong, I'm just waiting for those bombs to drop, y'know?