Shitpost-free leak discussion?

>>26219530
Skeptical. I admit that the trademark names fits two of them surprisingly well, but I am still skeptical.

Why are people so convinced that we're going to see starters tomorrow? It could very easily just be boxart legendaries or even just silhouettes of said boxart legendaries.

>>26219530
I have to reveal something: I eat owls fur balls everyday.
It tastes so sour and yet, it feels so right to do it.
I have a little ritual I do every night after taking off my shoes.
I like to call it "smelling the truth". I take an owl fur ball and insert it in one of my used sock. I smell it for one minute and then, I let it macerate in vinegar and swallow it.
Yes.I even swallow the little mammals bones hidden in it without actually chewing them.
I do it since I'm 6 and continue to do so to this day.
One time, my mom saw me doing it at lunch, and she contacted a psychologist.
He said I was autistic.
I was so mad. So FUCKING MAD.
I litterally punch the table of his desk and told him I'll show him who am I. The fucker ! He didn't knew who i was.
He didn't knew Who I was:
I, the great Zachipster the official president of the leaks are fucking real association.
I am Zac FUCKING hipster, my dad could rip his little mustache off anyday !

And here we are I'm here to show you owls are my friends and makes me eat since my youngest days !!!

they're obviously real

They're fake. End of story. No point in discussing shit fakemon when they're about to be debunked.

>>26219564
>>26219568
nice phoneposting faglord

>>26219530
I'm playing neutral, as I like to do when things haven't been fully confirmed one way or the other.
by playing this field, I can laugh at the people who were adamant about one side and were wrong, no matter who was right. And the only cost is giving up bragging rights.

>>26219530
>Are you skeptical?
Very skeptical. I want them to be real, but I don't have any faith in this outcome.

> Do you think they're real? If so, why?
I think there's a really tiny chance that they are real. Only because the artist himself hasn't come out and admitted that it's fake.

>Anyone hope these are real, or like their designs?
Yeah, I hope they're real. I genuinely like their designs and think they have potential to evolve into greater things. I also would love to see the majority of /vp/ BTFO beyond belief.

>>26219555
I mean if they're showing the first gameplay footage wouldn't that be prime time to show them?
I'll admit it wouldn't be the scummiest thing GF has ever done but it makes sense to show them.

I like them but I still have a hard time trying to convince myself that the rock thing, or, "Cubble" as they say-- is a starter and not just a pseudo or a cavemon. I can see Owl and Blue as starters though.

I'll have to be honest and say:
I'm 80% sure These aren't the real deal. I kinda don't like the design of these mons

>>26219530
I think they are 100% fake and looks like utter trash.

>>26219555
I thinks it's because masuda confirmed it to be a video, so it's not just silhouettes. Still, doesn't even have to show pokemon at all, it could easily be something stupid like more concept art and a bird. Or they could do an ORAS and just show boxes

>>26219607
You can feature silhouettes in a video.

>>26219530

>the final eve of owlgate?

Hah, you wish. The trailer will just reveal the mascots and some gameplay footage. The starters are being saved for July or so.

>>26219586
I think they're quirky and different from what they've done before, if they're real. They definitely stand out and I like how each one caters to a particular taste. (Owl is quirky, rock thing is kind of badass and seal thing is cute af)

>>26219530
They're not fucking real what the fuck is wrong with you people? /vp/ might actually be more retarded than /v/

>>26219620
God please no

>>26219627
>/vp/ might actually be more retarded than /v/

or am we?

>>26219607
I'm thinking they'll show something similar to their X and Y trailer, show starters, box legends and some gameplay. It worked then?

>>26219627
It's literally just a minority that believes that they're real.

They can only be real if the leaker saw them and tried to replicate them with terrible drawing skills, thus the real things barely resembling the pictures we have.

Otherwise they just lack both standard drawing skills (owl's terrible perspective foreshortening) and design logic (spike monster thing making zero sense and the "horn" on the fish looking as if it is behind it instead of the middle of its head).

>>26219530
>Can we have a genuine discussion on the final eve of owlgate?
Hell, I'll give it a shot.
>Are you sceptical?
Extremely.
>Do you think they're real?
Not even a little.
>like their designs?
Owl isn't bad but very bland. The other two are terrible.
>gut instinct says to to think fake until proven.
That's a good instinct. Very logical.
>The thing that gets me about them is how much they stand out from other leaks, in both design and origin terms; they're not trying to hard to be textbook Pokemon like all the Deviant art tier fakes, I can actually see them being something Gamefreak would genuinely design.
I want you to look at all the other starters. Really examine their faces and proportions. Note how they're 2/2.5 heads tall. Note how none of them have tiny beady eyes. Note their clear animal influence. Their color schemes and so on. Note how different they are to these 3.
>NO ONE has proven them fake yet.
That's not how the scientific meathod works.
>they are STILL being discussed,
They where originally written off when they first appeared, but the leaked names gave the owl a small bit of credence, which the other two have leached off of.
>all the other ones have either been dismissed or proven false, surely that's gotta be worth something?
These haven't been "proven false" yet because there's not much to go on at all. All we have are these vague crops.

>>26219626
I agree. I've got this feeling from them since I first saw them that they are original and quirky, and stand out a lot from the other leaks. I'm hoping that they're concept art, and the actual designs are much better.

But most likely it's fake.

>>26219594
Sort of same but I can see why they'd want to design one that was unorthodox, considering their current obsession with trend-breaking.

>>26219627
They may very well not be but its fun to speculate, what the fuck else have we got to do?

>>26219530
Their not real, the owl thing is just a fake leak turnt into some small cult meme shit pot following, we know they aren't real, the people saying they are real are just saying it as a joke to get a reaction from people.

>>26219530
I imagine that in 2016 GF can hire artists who can correctly line up facial structure. "roothoot's face is all over the place and leads me to believe it's fake.

That rock thing could in no way be a starter because then Nintendo wouldn't get good qt plush money from such a design.

I don't like any of the three designs really and have gotten quite sick of everyone here trying to tell me either of them are good

>>26219671
lol yes they are

Neutral. Wouldn't care if they're real or fake, would just choose the water starter like I always do.

>>26219676
wottergate tier straw clutching

you're wrong and an idiot who never learns his lessons

>>26219530
100% bullshit

>>26219530
>>26219685
Heres an example of one them, as you can see this one has most likely chomped on the bait as hard as he could with his baby teeth and now actually believes these silly meme Owl shit posts are legit.

>>26219706
>>26219699
Screw both of you for making /vp/ such a cesspool.

I don't belive in them at all.
The designs aren't particularly believable, two of them just happen to fit the names somewhat (and even then its up to debate, as japanese can be tricky), and the only reason why they're still talked about is because no one straight up came and said "I made them" with proof (there was once someone who showed layers for the owl, but that's not too hard to do), and just because some people like to shitpost.

>>26219727
You can just block the namefag you know.

>>26219676
This. Roothoot's face is completely awkward in all his pictures. I still believe the owl is realer then rock abortion or kawaii orb

The constant shitposting and falseflagging about these designs makes me physically ill

>>26219737
the names that came out afterwards

so just a lucky guess right?

File: angry.jpg (769KB, 1600x1129px) Image search: [Google]

769KB, 1600x1129px

>>26219530
Fake. Fake. Fake. Fakety fake. FUCKING fake.

And if there's ANY OF YOU who thinks there's even a 0.1% chance that they're even remotely real, then you're all LITERAL RETARDS.

/thread. This thread is over. Nothing to see or post here. Move on.

>>26219760
le badly drawn meme

you really should have learned your lesson from wottergate

>>26219766
>if i say the word it a lot it will make it true
afraid not

>>26219777
wottergate was way more acceptable than this shit

>>26219766
Get a load of this faggot.

>>26219530
fake until proven true, so sceptical
if they end up being real, it would be the first time I'd drop my starter. All of them are ugly as fuck.

>>26219766
You're gonna be BTFO so hard

File: image.jpg (19KB, 204x190px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 204x190px

>>26219530
I highly, HIGHLY doubt they're actually real, but I wouldn't mind if they were really.

Memes aside, I think the owl looks alright, and would be interested to see it's evolutions. It's probably the best designed of the three.
Granted that's not saying very much but still.

>>26219797
Eh they're better than the Unova starters IMO.

So how would /vp/ feel if the grass starter was an owl, but it wasn't THE owl? As in, it looks completely different from "Hootroot".

These might be real...Jesus. The possibilities for this to be real is there. I'm freaking out! I DON'T WANT THESE TO BE REAL! !!

>>26219788
>>26219795
>>26219805
I can call you out on your retardation as much as I want to, because I know that I am right and that you're wrong. Get wrecked tomorrow.

>>26219766
You're the other extreme which is equally foolish.
There's at least a 0.1% chance that they could do something totally different this gen. Be skeptical, not stubborn.

File: 1459476498254.jpg (40KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 600x450px

>>26219530
I'm skeptical, but due to the possible trademarks leaks and how these leaked many months ago before that, if these are to be real, in some form or fashion, they will probably look nothing or slightly similar to what they are at the moment. In my personal opinion, I honestly wouldn't mind them, if it wasn't for all the owl shitposters.

>>26219766
Calm down, buddy. Don't make yourself look unintelligent

>>26219836
Then owlfags will say roothoot was concept art (as they've been saying for a long time now). I don't see any scenario where the owlfags get BTFO tomorrow. Denialfags are just being delusional as usual.

File: Insurance.jpg (40KB, 440x234px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 440x234px

>>26219836
>>26219867

>>26219836
Depends on what it looks like and how good it is in game. I'm in an apparent minority that thinks the owl actually looks pretty good relatively speaking so I would be a little disappointed ifbitvwasn't this particular one, but it could still be something I like even more

>>26219852
You don't even know what I believe. I'm just calling you out on your faggotry.

>>26219750
Anonymous is not a namefag.

File: 1371270535335.png (148KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 800x800px

HEY a while ago on here, I saw a cool timeline of all the leaks and info releases that ever happened for the mainline Poke games since like gen 3 but I didnt save it.

Anybody know what I'm talking about and would be so kind as to post it?

The "leaks" are fake, the creator didn't give a shit about them after everyone ignored him in march and never claimed ownership, but after the trademarks coincidentally ended up "confirming" the owl, some kid made the connection and now shitposters are running with it, going as far as to dig the most obscure shit to make the other two fit the trademarks.
I've seen at least another grass owl starter (Cactowl, I think) that existed before the trademarks were discovered

Can't wait to see the real Gamefreak-designed grass owl starter. I'm sure it will be cute and will put that cartoonish abomination out of his misery

>>26219906
But zachipster~presidentoftheleaksarefuckingrealassociation is. Block it.

>>26219652
I get a lot of your points but
>Note their clear animal influence
Do you mean specific animal influence? Because apart from 'cubble' their animal influence seem clear enough to me. And cubble can be stretched to look like some kind of rabbit/chinchilla
Also, their heads aren't that small, the only thing I really notice is they have no separate necks, which in that case, neither does chikarita.
>none of them have tiny beady eyes
Well cyndaqilll had its eyes closed so you could say that's similar. Also again only 'cubble' has this anomaly.

From what I see a lot of counter arguments against these starters come from the fire one, which too me seems a bit closed minded because its entirely possible gamefreak could mix it up a bit for one starter, considering how much they like surprising people these days. Or their fake, who knows.

>>Are you skeptical?
No. To be skeptical means to have doubts, and there's no doubt in my mind that they're not real.
>Anyone hope these are real, or like their designs?
I hope not. The owl is the only decent design, and even then I hate it because of its punchable face. The rock thing doesn't even resemble any kind of actual animal and looks like shit (though if it were real I'd pick it due to my curiosity of what kind of abomination it becomes), and dolphin seal thing is just plain bad.

>>26219913
lol the extent of your denial is incredible

cactowl looked ridiculous

are you not worried by the fact the the owl matches the trademark but ALSO is part of the ONLY of set of starters to not be debuked?

also, the water trademark speaks of mari, meaning 'ball', and the thing is just so ROUND

sorry, to not believe these are real is just unreasonable and hopefully these will be revealed tomorrow so we can all laugh at you

Honestly I don't think there real

File: 13145567229.jpg (12KB, 300x258px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 300x258px

>>26219530
I just don't want them to be real because they ALL look awful and if they were real this will be the first gen where I hate every single starter.

I don't care about BTFO or any shit like that, I just don't want to rock any of these guys on my team for even an instant.

I'm just sitting here hoping for better designs.

File: 1423947764329.png (105KB, 450x420px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 450x420px

>>26219530
They are not real. That's it. This whole owlgate is just shitposting that got terribly out of hand. We've had numerous fake starter leaks. Why would these be real? There have been a couple of polls asking what people think about owl and friends, and every single time a great majority has agreed that they are fake. This proves that there aren't even many owlfags: they are just a small, extremely loud minority that have been shitting up this board with their nonstop shitposting.

The biggest giveaway about the leaks being fake isn't even the owl, but the Fire-type starter. It looks so fucking hideous that I don't even know what the hell it's supposed to be. It looks like some deformed, mentally challenged rock with tumors. Game Freak would never make a first stage starter like that because it's not marketable in the slightest. All first stage starters so far (with the exception of Snivy for whatever reason) are clearly intended to be cute, so there's no way in hell that Game Freak would make a starter that's Garbodor-tier ugly.

>inb4 "added to the collage :^)"
Whatever. I can't wait for CoroCoro to finally silence these shitposters.

>>26219913
I remember when they first appeared and they were popular since way before the leaked trademarks came out. If anything they just rekindled the fire.

>>26220056
/thread

That rock thing looks nothing like the cat the trademark leak described.

>>26220018
Do you not have a doubt in your mind that they are real? Are you really that ignorant? Do you realize how much people are going to make fun of you if they end up being fake? You're going to make up a majority of the compilations, if not all, since you're the most infamous owlposter there is.

>>26220056
Idk its kind of cute in a sort of pitiful way. Sort of like a pug/bulldog. I could see gamefreak doing that.

>>26219961
>Do you mean specific animal influence?
Yes.
>Also, their heads aren't that small
The fish is only a head, and it's tough to tell where the rock's head even begins.
>Well cyndaqilll had its eyes closed so you could say that's similar.
Even though its eyes are closed, it's still clearly meant to be "cute". They're still rounded and large. The rock creatures eyes are very sharp and intense. Far more preditorial than any other starter.
I doubt GF would want to change it up that much, especially when marketing trends to kids do not support that idea at all.

>>26220056
>Whatever. I can't wait for CoroCoro to finally silence these shitposters.
Don't you mean the Direct we're getting tomorrow?

>>26220056
well, there the only ones out of the 'numerous fake starter leaks' you speak of to not be debunked. they look real (if youre not a newfag you can sense legit gamefreak art) and also yoy can clutch at straws all you want, they match the trademarks that were released months after far too well to be fake

they're real

>>26220122
It's not a direct, it's going to be a trailer on the official Pokémon YouTube accounts.

>>26220056
>(with the exception of Snivy
Snivy has the basics of cute design. Big head. Bug eyes.

>>26220131
yoy

>>26220122
>Don't you mean the Direct we're getting tomorrow?
Direct, CoroCoro, whatever. We might not even get the starters tomorrow, people are just hoping that we do.

>>26220151
>Snivy has the basics of cute design. Big head. Bug eyes.
Sure, but it still looks way too smug when compared to all the others that are somehow happy or cute.

File: Roothootgrrrr.png (9KB, 169x244px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 169x244px

Been a while since I made and OC, much less any new Grrr faces. But I came out of retirement to make this one.

Honestly, they're probably not real. It'd be really cool if they were because we'd have another Wottergate on our hands, but I don't think lighting will strike twice here.

That being said, despite all the shitposting, the whole Pokemon Community is looking on us here. They're gonna instantly post any sort of leaks somewhere else and its always fun to troll them and ourselves.

There's been a lot of relatively poor quality leaks this time around though, so these starters are really the biggest things I've seen. The artwork over in another thread that made Dream World Style art is really nice, and that's one of my favorite things. I mean someone made a fucking 3D model...that shit is awesome.

>>26220091
He's Mr. Shitpost
I was here when the trademarks were revealed, he specifically put on that name to shitpost. I tried to warn people to not respond to him because all his arguments were "denial" and "just you wait", but I gave up after an hour. He doesn't give a shit. After a while, more shitposters adopted that name too, that's the reason he's here 24/7

>>26220131
>they look real
I'll give you the owl and even the rock fish, but the blue thing does not look like a legit Pokemon design whatsoever.

I don't believe they are real but I always end up defending the owl in these kind of arguments. It's just that the denialfag arguments are so fucking terrible that I can't let them go, they bother me more than the owlfag ones. At least I know the owlfags are shitposting but many of the denialfags are legit retards.

I wouldn't be upset with them being real. Cubble has unexpectedly really grown on me.

>>26220173
>but it still looks way too smug when compared to all the others that are somehow happy or cute.
Smug and cute aren't mutually exclusive.

>>26220209
lol yes it does

it actually looks extremely generic imo

>>26220248
Ikr, I think cubble is my favourite. It looks the most cool and fresh and has the potential to evolve into something really neat.

>>26220237
>everyone who doesn't believe the owl is real is a retard
No anon, you are the retard
You already know they are trolling, and that their arguments and "proofs" are stupid and even made up. Did they brainwash you?

>>26220333
I see you failed reading comprehension. And logic too since I never said everyone who doesn't believe the owl is a retard.

>>26220391
Not the anon you replied to, but I don't see how yo ucan think denialfag arguments are any worse than owlfag arguments. These people do the most ridiculous mental gymnastics to try and made the rock thing fit the cat name, and then come to the conclusion that it's a chinchilla, which apparently is a type of cat now.

>>26220391
>I don't believe they are real
Ok, me either
>It's just that the denialfag arguments are so fucking terrible that I can't let them go
There's no such thing as a denialfag argument, there's nothing wrong with not believing those terrible looking "starters"
Owlfags arguments on the other hand ARE retarded and some of their proof is simply not true. Muh 2ch, muh cat chinchilla rock, muh 2ch, muh real until proven fake, etc.
>many of the denialfags are legit retards.
Read
>>26220333

File: 1462540662887.jpg (111KB, 460x276px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 460x276px

>>26219530
Theyre real

>>26220462
Both of their arguments are equally terrible. However I understand that owlfags are trolling, so their arguments don't bother me. Anyone with a brain should see this too so there is no point in arguing with them. On the other hand many denialfags legitimately believe their arguments debunk the owl, when these arguments are just as stupid as the owlfag ones. That bothers me a lot more and I feel the need to try to refute them.

>>26220558
we are not trolling

we know they are real

lol a single argument of theirs comes anywhere close to 'debunking' the owl, just how deluded are you

>>26220483
>There's no such thing as a denialfag argument
You don't seem to have been very active here lately. There are plenty of denialfag arguments, the marketing one for example.
Also, reread my post:
>many of the denialfags are legit retards.
Many, not all. And
>>26220333
didn't even understand half of what I said.

>>26220638
>le marketing argument
>le badly drawn argument

>>26220653
How are those arguments wrong? Explain.

>>26220653
>le not confirmed fake argument
>le I'm right and I know it argument

>>26220681
its straw clutching

both those arguments were made repeatedly during wottergate

>>26220681
Well obviously it's because he put le at the front. That automatically that stance silly and wrong.

I think the owl could be a prototype design but the other two are definitely fake/not starters. As pointed out numerous time, neither resemble a cat or a sea lion.

>>26220681
>marketing
Completely subjective and speculative.
It depends entirely on what a person considers to be marketable and assumes this same definition is the one that gamefreak uses. It also assumes gamefreak will continue with the exact same business model that they may have been following until now.
>badly drawn
Owlfags have been claiming it's concept art. Concept art isn't usually properly done, just look at the sawsbuck concept art.

File: dpstarters.jpg (11KB, 226x186px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 226x186px

>>26219530

Fake. Why?

Why does Owl have one GIGANTIC eye and one normal one? (Yes, it does, look again perspectivelsss-fag.)

Why does Firechilla have basically no features, and appears to be a bunch of jagged lines? (Seriously. Have you tried thinking about what that thing could look like as a 3D sprite?)

Why is Blue bland as shit? It's just Spheal.

And why, why why why, are these poorly drawn sprites looking in different directions and looking nothing like any previous sprites be any different from all the myriad DOZENS of fakemons we've had in the past? Remember purple-dino starter? Or blue-pig starter?

Seriously, I swear this entire board is trolls trolling trolls. No one could ACTUALLY care this much about this nonsense.

File: 1462681810069.gif (141KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 300x300px

I like the Owl; It's bland but I think it could work, and I've gotten used to Cubble. Finpip is another story, but I wouldn't mind it if they're real. I'm skeptical and think they're most likely fake though, and I'm okay with that.

If the Trademarks are Pokémon–related and their Translations are correct, we'll get an Owl, so I've already gotten used to the idea of an Owl Grass Starter. Could be just another pokémon too.
But eh, I'm hyped for whatever's coming.

As for the rest, I'm neutral towards Owlfags, because I ignore them and don't participate in their threads – People who engage with them, however, are mostly annoying and are equally to blame for the constant shitposting IMO. Ignoring Owlfags and letting it die down was possible, but some people choose not to and here we are.

Denialfags are okay, they're a rational bunch. Owlfags are okay if they truly like or believe in these mons.

Whatever happens it's been quite a ride.

>>26220764
>marketing
>Completely subjective and speculative.
Absolutely not.

>>26220712
>a leak the majority of /vp/ thought was fake happened to be real leaks
>the majority of /vp/ thinks Roothoot, Cubble, and Finpup are fake
>that means it's Wottergate all over again!!! anyone who disagrees is clutching at straws!!! XD

>>26219530
I'd give the owl maybe like a 15% chance of being real.
Magma abortion is definitely fake though, and so is the water thing by association.

I guess the magma could maybe fit in as a Pokemon design with some tweaks, but no way in hell as a starter.

Honestly I have no clue why zachipster and other shitposters are so adamant about memeing these guys. It wouldn't surprise me if some of them were the fakers and are going to try and pull a "lol rekd i fooled you all" tomorrow but who really knows.

>>26220791
well for starters, they're the only ones that haven't been debunked

>>26220826
>Honestly I have no clue why zachipster and other shitposters are so adamant about memeing these guys
because they're real and we know it.

you'll see soon enough

>>26220799
I completely agree.

>>26220806
If the denialfags posted any sort of research about the marketability of pokemon or the like it wouldn't. But all denialfags say is they are not marketable because they are ugly or they are not cute. That's a completely subjective opinion.

>>26220818
Nice strawman.

>>26220131
>if youre not a newfag you can sense legit gamefreak art

im going to die

>>26220920
What do you mean? It's exactly what zachipster is saying.

>>26220764
>It depends entirely on what a person considers to be marketable and assumes this same definition is the one that gamefreak uses.
After six generations, we know what Game Freak considers to be a marketable starter design.
>It also assumes gamefreak will continue with the exact same business model that they may have been following until now.
Game Freak really doesn't shake up its design and marketing strategy very much, especially with series staples like starters. If anything, the design trend is for Pokemon to be more and more cutesy and cartoony. Ponyta and Keldeo are often compared as an example of this.

It would be extremely surprising, unusual, and an outright poor decision on Game Freak's part to have Cubble/whatever as a Fire starter.

>>26220920
Anon, that's exactly what he said.

>>26220843
Screencapping this, see ya when you get BTFO tomorrow (or whenever we see the real starters)

>>26220974
Please compile all of zachipster's posts. He deserves his own compilation for how adamant and childish he's being about this whole thing.

>>26220827
Like the blatant signs of Photoshop eraser aren't evident in the owl picture. Personally I don't mind the design, it gives me that Snivy vibe and would probably be my starter pick if it was real, but let's be honest it isn't.

>>26220907
Cute characters are typically 2 heads tall. Eyes and heads have exaggerated proportions like babies. They're typically expressive too. Owl and fish could work, but rock thing isn't worth a second glance.

>>26220958
>>26220946
i just said those arguments are bullshit. those particular arguments are proven bullshit. it was strawman

>>26220952
>After six generations, we know what Game Freak considers to be a marketable starter design.
Really? And how do you know? Did gamefreak tell you?
>Game Freak really doesn't shake up its design and marketing strategy very much, especially with series staples like starters.
Once again, did Gamefreak show you what their marketing strategy was? How do we know how much it has changed in the past?
So far all you've given me are statements with nothing to back it up.
>If anything, the design trend is for Pokemon to be more and more cutesy and cartoony. Ponyta and Keldeo are often compared as an example of this.
I find them to be very cartoony. Once again showing why this whole argument is very subjective.

>>26219530
Serious discussion? Like, seriously for real? Ignoring the obvious owl baiting?

It's ridiculous to imagine the owl is anything other than a fake. Leaks of starters have never occurred weeks before an official reveal.

The accompanying fire starter isn't even a pokemon - it's a zigzaggy "thing" that would never be a real starter. Starters are designed to be cute and easily marketable - the fire thing is an abomination.

The owl meme has ran and ran simply because the board is on a go-slow in the lead up to real leaks. You would be insane to believe it's a real starter pokemon.

>>26221050
>Once again showing why this whole argument is very subjective.
but hey, if you repeat it enough times and sound cocksure enough it becomes objective, at least thats what denialfags would have you believe

>>26221062
STOP with this marketing bullshit

>>26220999
Where do those measurements come from? How do you know it's the same proportions that Gamefreak uses? If you calculated them from existing pokemon, how did you determine what pokemons can be considered cute and how do you know those are all (no more no less) the same pokemon that Gamefreak considers (and purposefully made) to look cute?

File: logic.jpg (120KB, 624x481px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 624x481px

Owlfags, desu

>>26221050
>Really? And how do you know? Did gamefreak tell you?
How do I know? Because I looked at the designs they made.
It really is that simple.
The starter designs they use are a direct consequence of their philosophy for starter design. That's obvious.

>Once again, did Gamefreak show you what their marketing strategy was?
It's clear what their marketing is by virtue of it being marketing. You can tell a great deal about a company's marketing strategy just by looking at what they do, because literally the entire point of marketing is how you make your product look and what you make your consumers think. If your audience doesn't understand your marketing, then you have completely failed at marketing.

Pokemon starters are cute and appeal to kids. The fact that they are consistently so suggests Game Freak knows what they're doing. The evidence is the way that starter Pokemon are used in the anime, in spinoffs, in merchandise, and in all of Game Freak's other assorted marketing. It's part of a "cute mascot" philosophy that has been going on in Japan for quite some time.

Tell me what part of that analysis was "subjective" and not just an honest analysis of their marketing strategy on the most obvious levels which any kid could recognize.

>>26221087
Anyone with a shred of design sense knows that magma abortion simply isn't marketable.
And no, marketing is not subjective. It's based on the tastes of your audience, which can be objectively analyzed.

>>26219530
>Are you sceptical? Do you think they're real? If so, why? Anyone hope these are real, or like their designs?

They're not real. As far as their designs, they're pretty horrible as pokemon, although I actually rather like the look of the red one, it doesn't fit as a Pokemon.

As for why they're fake, for one they have not been proven real, and everything must be assumed faked until proven otherwise. The fact that they have no been proven fake yet means nothing. Anyone can draw a fake leak, especially ones as shittily drawn as the owl and co, and then simply upload it wherever.

Secondly, their designs are inconsistent. The owl is incredibly bland, even by gen 1 standards, while the other two are incredibly overdesigned. The art in general is also just really shitty.

Thirdly, the name trademarks mean nothing. They do not fit the names at all. Mokuroh more easily translates as something like "dark wood" than "tree owl", Ashimari could be either "evil squid" or "round sea lion", and the blue thing looks nothing like a sea lion or a squid. Nyabby is of course nya + tabby, and the red thing is in no way a cat, nor is it a chinchilla. And even if it were a chinchilla, chinchillas do not meow.

Fourthly, these did not originate from 2ch, and even if they did, it doesn't give them any legitimacy. 2ch can have fake leaks just as much as we can.

File: wud ya.png (1MB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1024x1024px

I'm gonna be up all night, so hopefully they trailer is something worth waiting for.. I'm hoping for a X and Y styled trailer.

>>26222351
????????????????

>>26219530
>they're not trying to hard to be textbook Pokemon like all the Deviant art tier fakes
WHAT WITH YOUR FKING ROOTFAG HOOT WITH NO BEAK AND SMALL HEAD DAKJLDSAKLJADSJKLLKF

>>26222406
Enjoy that imminent two day ban buddy

File: zozzle.jpg (9KB, 292x215px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 292x215px

>>26219637
fuck sake, well played anon

>>26222487
How would he get banned for that?

>>26219637
got a chuckle out of me you loathsome cunt

File: 1457051942358.gif (6KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 250x250px

Why do people hope the starter leak is true?
NONE of those 3 look good in any way shape or form.
I'm hoping its fake just so we don't get those three little shits.

Though knowing modern Pokemon it probably is true

File: 1423105087734.jpg (70KB, 594x480px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 594x480px

>>26219530

If you think for a second that these look even remotely like real or plausible Pokemon you are an absolute fucking retard. This isn't shitposting, it's a genuine fact. Their artwork is fucking terrible and looks like it was drawn by a child, not a professional concept artist. Their designs barely even make sense, let alone look anything like Pokemon.

To be completely unable to recognize Pokemon's style, despite exposing yourself to the series so much, or to distinguish it from these grotesque scribbles, you would have to be mentally challenged. Likewise if you fell for this underage tripfag's blatantly transparent, bush-league shitposting.

If you're even entertaining the notion that they might be real you need to leave this board.