Competitor and Arceus

[Chou Toshio]

^Ok I didn't say it, Obi didn't say it but by "Outside device," I believe we meant "Outside device not licensed/endorsed by nintendo." Since toys R us stuff (or other pokemon cartridges) are endorsed by Nintendo, it's fine. Since the AR isn't, that's hacked.

 

[merubin]

I'll double check or not as I please, thank you very much.

Now there's a MAN's man.

Okay. But even Dusknoir isn't obtainable with just the DS and the cartridge. A second catridge and DS are needed.

Not true. You can evolve trade only Pokemon by depositing them in the GTS and then just screwing around for a few minutes before withdrawing them.

 

[McCloudDash]

Aright, obi, hows about this. Whatever you can obtain simply using a game cartridge is fine? Maybe ill just get myself a copy of the japanese d/p and get some belly drum/aqua jet azumarills using only that cartridge, cause after all, i didnt use any third party devices to achieve my creation, so it must be completely legal right? i mean..i didnt use an action replay, so its not illegal, and far be it from me to throw around terms like "semi-legit", oh lord no.

Ok, ok, stop, now. I know. I know that "Just because i said x, doesnt mean i meant y." But im just using your own stupid arguement against you. "stupid" being both figurative, and literal, as you claim to not know literally any of what im talking. Well, unless you really are blinded by your own logic. But then, let me finish, please.


Lets just say..for a minute..that it was someone else. Lets take shaymin here, i know that he hasnt had an event yet, but he's obtainable in the cartridge, and i want to keep it in D/P.

So shaymin...He's fine, its all good, since people can get him legally without a third-party device. Now, some people are gonna get him legitly (meaning, not by hacking), and some people are gonna hack for him, but that doesnt change when it comes down to what really matters in a battle. In the end, those two are exactly the same, and battles will be fought with it uncaring as to whether or not hacking was involved.

So to clear up my stance on the issue, when it comes right down to the wire in battle, hacking (completely outside of ridiculous hacking, ex; movesets, abilities, abnormal EVs, etc.) does not change the outcomes of anything that would normally exist in the parameters of the game. And i completely understand your..well..extremist views, kinda like the cop that gives a person a speeding ticket for doing 61 mph in a 60 zone. Thats all good with me, i cant say anything against your opinion, because i really have alot of respect for you in many ways, but honestly, the world isnt black and white. I can safely say that the method of obtaining a pokemon is alot different and alot less important than something that affects the entire game, like a pokemon's moveset. And when you look at it, there is absolutely no difference between hacking an item for shaymin, or hacking an item for arceus, except for the fact that, by complete chance, we have a glitch to legitly recieve shaymin, and since we still allow shaymin if you hack its item, then i think arceus should be too. Cause at the end of the day, (literally, right now for me...), the battle is the only thing that makes the difference. And method of obtaining has no impact on the battle.


Im sorry if i still didnt come across good, its the best i could do at 1:15 in the morning ;/

 

[Namtar]

Not true. You can evolve trade only Pokemon by depositing them in the GTS and then just screwing around for a few minutes before withdrawing them.

Really? Good to know. Unfortunately I can't use that because I don't have the outside device that would let me use the GTS...

 

[merubin]

I'm pretty sure there's a McDonald's in Kent, no matter what Almost Live reruns would have one believe.

 

[umbarsc]

Wow, the second time I've left this thread alone and later had pages to read.

I guess I need to come up with a massive post on the matter now, huh?

Well, Arceus is possible to have without the use of outside forces. Arceus is but the item isn't. Arceus is possible to have without hacking it, you hack yourself an Azure Flute and go to Mt. Coronet. If the argument is "If you need an AR to get it it's illegitimate", Azure Flute should be banned, not Arceus. You don't need 'outside devices' to get Arceus, you need Azure Flute, and the methods you go to to obtain the Azure Flute is completely irrelevent in terms of Arceus's legitimacy to the methods you go to when you obtain Arceus. Arceus that you have to get by plugging into a code into the AR to summon a Timid 31/31/31/31/31/31 Arceus in your PC is far less legitimate than the "semi-legit" example I brought up earlier.

Second, I am forced to bring up my analogy again. Have YOU checked EVERY SINGLE WishBliss/Darkrai/WishMence/whatever that's come out, and made sure that there is in fact a good-natured one with perfect IVs out? No? Then you are using an illegitimate Pokemon, shame on you, and you deserve a great big spanking from Colin. When only a limited number has come out, you can't argue "technically 31/31/31/31/31/31 is as legitimate as 5/5/5/5/5/5".

Also, the simulator is designed to simulate not the game, but the battling function from the game. Whatever is possible within the simulator is legitimate within the simulator, be it Thunderpunch + Heal Spore Breloom, Hypnosis + Brave Bird Crobat, Belly Drum + Aqua Jet Azumarill, whatever, it's all legit until it has been banned. If the creator gives you the okay on a certain Poke, it is allowed, and there is no reason to change that, at all. Rapid Spin Tyranitar or Baton Pass Snorlax or Brave Bird Aerodactyl is all legitimate as long as it's possible within the server, so there is nothing illegal about Arceus on a simulator until the creator says so. I don't see why the simulator has to follow the game's every exhortation.

Yepp, that's it, only 3 paragraphs, sue me.

 

[Jumpman16]

Wow, the second time I've left this thread alone and later had pages to read.

I guess I need to come up with a massive post on the matter now, huh?

Well, Arceus is possible to have without the use of outside forces. Arceus is but the item isn't. Arceus is possible to have without hacking it, you hack yourself an Azure Flute and go to Mt. Coronet. If the argument is "If you need an AR to get it it's illegitimate", Azure Flute should be banned, not Arceus. You don't need 'outside devices' to get Arceus, you need Azure Flute, and the methods you go to to obtain the Azure Flute is completely irrelevent in terms of Arceus's legitimacy to the methods you go to when you obtain Arceus. Arceus that you have to get by plugging into a code into the AR to summon a Timid 31/31/31/31/31/31 Arceus in your PC is far less legitimate than the "semi-legit" example I brought up earlier.

if you have to do x illegitimate act to obtain a y that will in turn allow you to obtain z, you have still acquired z through illegitimate means.

Second, I am forced to bring up my analogy again. Have YOU checked EVERY SINGLE WishBliss/Darkrai/WishMence/whatever that's come out, and made sure that there is in fact a good-natured one with perfect IVs out? No? Then you are using an illegitimate Pokemon, shame on you, and you deserve a great big spanking from Colin. When only a limited number has come out, you can't argue "technically 31/31/31/31/31/31 is as legitimate as 5/5/5/5/5/5".

a and b and c might be illegitimate, so...let's allow d that can definitely only be obtained illegitimately? come on =(

Also, the simulator is designed to simulate not the game, but the battling function from the game. Whatever is possible within the simulator is legitimate within the simulator, be it Thunderpunch + Heal Spore Breloom, Hypnosis + Brave Bird Crobat, Belly Drum + Aqua Jet Azumarill, whatever, it's all legit until it has been banned. If the creator gives you the okay on a certain Poke, it is allowed, and there is no reason to change that, at all. Rapid Spin Tyranitar or Baton Pass Snorlax or Brave Bird Aerodactyl is all legitimate as long as it's possible within the server, so there is nothing illegal about Arceus on a simulator until the creator says so. I don't see why the simulator has to follow the game's every exhortation.

Yepp, that's it, only 3 paragraphs, sue me.

huh, the simulator serves to simulate the cartridge games as accurately as possible. what you're describing is allowed on mod servers, but the official server simulates the cartridge game. anything is "possible within the server", but that doesn't mean colin will suddenly make bp snorlax or whatever the hell random pokemon set that isn't possible on the cartridge without hacking

 

[obi]

Aright, obi, hows about this. Whatever you can obtain simply using a game cartridge is fine? Maybe ill just get myself a copy of the japanese d/p and get some belly drum/aqua jet azumarills using only that cartridge, cause after all, i didnt use any third party devices to achieve my creation, so it must be completely legal right? i mean..i didnt use an action replay, so its not illegal, and far be it from me to throw around terms like "semi-legit", oh lord no.

Don't misrepresent my position. My position is that things which are impossible to obtain are automatically unacceptable. From that, you cannot conclude that all things which are possible to obtain are automatically acceptable. It would be like me saying that all cups made of glass are breakable, and from that you state my position as being that all cups not made of glass are unbreakable.

For instance, I'm entirely for banning OHKOs, despite the fact that you can, in fact, use them in game. This is not a contradiction of my position because it's possible to actually enforce this ban (unlike, say, a ban on critical hits). If a Pokemon is obtainable, then it's up for consideration as to whether it's allowed.

 

[umbarsc]

@Jumpman

Hey, come on, I have the rest of my week algebra-free. Don't spoil it =[

Anyways, yes, the means you obtained it was illegitimate, but the outcome wasn't illegitimate. I'd post a clever analogy, but why bother?

Yes, it could possibly be legitimate, but the same can be said for Arceus. It might be legitimate... Nintendo might intend to release it tomorrow, so why shouldn't we use it? It could be possible, but when only a limited number has come out, it either is or isn't. Until you have proven that such a Pokemon exists, it is considered illegitimate.

Actually, it does whatever the hell it wants. Up until now, Arceus was completely legitimate in uber battles in the Official Server, despite it not being, according to you, legit.

 

[McCloudDash]

I love how you dont even bother to read past one paragraph of mine, if that, obi. I was just pissed that you keep using the stupidity arguement so i used it. actually, if you read two lines down from what you quoted, you probably would have saved yourself some pointless quoting and posting right there, but whatever, i dont know why im wasting my time trying to save your time when you dont even care enough to address, much less even read, the majority of my arguement and my feelings.

Actually, it does whatever the hell it wants. Up until now, Arceus was completely legitimate in uber battles in the Official Server, despite it not being, according to you, legit.

Which is exactly why, without evidence for anything at this point, we cant change arceus's status. The only way you can ban arceus is if you show proof that nintendo will never release it, and good luck, you know yourself that you cant do that now. And provided no back up on that, which is arguably your entire arguement, why change him? I dont see how nothing = change.

 

[obi]

I read your entire post. However, it rests entirely on the assumption that p->q is equivalent to ~p->~q, which is false.

What is the "stupidity argument"?

I know you said

Ok, ok, stop, now. I know. I know that "Just because i said x, doesnt mean i meant y." But im just using your own stupid arguement against you. "stupid" being both figurative, and literal, as you claim to not know literally any of what im talking. Well, unless you really are blinded by your own logic. But then, let me finish, please.

but you proceeded to ignore the fact that you are debating against me using a position I don't hold. To use my argument against me, you have to actually use my argument. I never said or even implied anything you said I did, and thus I quoted my previous post to re-explain my position.

You are right about one thing, though. I have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Portugeez]

Why is there a page for Arceus on Smogon.com? There should be one for MissingNo. as well!

 

[McCloudDash]

Basically, i've seen two arguements used against me, obi. One is the fact that we cannot conclude that arceus will ever have an event, much like we cannot conclude that we will or will not have move tutors in future diamond/pearl installments to make, say, thunderpunch poison heal breloom legal. Sure, they both logically seem to be the same, we dont have any evidence on either, no evidence pointing in either direction.
The second arguement used against me was categorization of all things illegitimate. Surely, without using the term semi-legit, then tpunch poison heal breloom is exactly as illegal as arceus is. Sounds reasonable. Except for the fact that your first arguement is in complete contradiction of your second arguement.

It is impossible to say that both of the aforementioned examples should be categorized together, given the fact that we have no evidence proving or disproving his future existance, and as such we cannot change him on the grounds of nothing! Surely, both examples are definitely categorized as the very same "illegality" for lack of a better term, But the fact that we cannot prove or disprove his legality with concrete evidence, combined with the fact that we have a basis for both examples from the already existing metagame, (might i remind you that tpunch poison heal breloom has always been illegal for obvious reasons, however arceus has never been fully "illegal"), solely points to the decision that, unless you can find a psychic in real life, we cannot go making changes to arceus's legality given no supporting evidence and no dissuading evidence. Arceus may require a third party device at the immediate moment, but you cannot deny the fact that you cant say "oh, arceus will never be released", and you also cannot bring a thunder punch poison heal breloom into comparison because you know as well as i do that there were preexisting conditions, and those say that arceus is legal, thunderpunch poison heal breloom is not, which completely nullifies any arguement made saying "we could get move tutors in the future." (Last i checked, your main problem is about the direct present time, so why are you comparing something that in the past has been polar opposites of legitimate?)

And honestly, obi, I feel like i've been doing all the talking here and you're just treating me like a child. At least meet me halfway and try to pursuade me with more than quoted responses, because you aren't getting anywhere, and you haven't changed my mind at all.

And most importantly im not directing my entire post towards you, obi, so please dont take it personally. (if you are). Its directed at every arguement i've seen made against arceus in this discussion, so dont assume i "dont know your point at all", and dont assume that im being disrespectful. Im just trying to address the entire issue presented here, while expressing my logic on the situation.

 

[Aziraphale]

McCloudDash, there is no evidence to disprove Arceus's future existence. But until someone can prove his present existence, we can only work with what we presently have available.

I'm not going to bother with this argument anymore because it basically boils down to people goign "I want him to be legit because he might be in the future and my methods for obtaining him are okay because I want them to be" and others going "I don't want him to be legit because he isn't available at the moment so your methods for obtaining him are not okay because they're not okay."

For the records, I still believe that anything "semi-legit" is not legit and that only things that are clearly intentional inclusions in the game are above board, anything that requires glitch exploitation or some form of external device like an AR or Pokesav is not alright because it's not meant to be a part of the game.

Adding additional rules within the realms of what is intended is fine because it refines the game further without altering the core of it and because they're user imposed are also agreed to before the battles. Which means that if both people agree that OHKOs are okay beforehand, then they're all good to use.

I defined "intended" before and was told I wasted my time because I had to use further definitions and acknowledged the flaws in my argument, but I defy anyone to tell me that anything that is clearly the result of a glitch or a hack is meant to be a part of the game, which is basically where this whole debate springs from.

Anyone who bothers trying to prove me wrong on my points here is wasting their time because I don't care anymore, you're all just arguing semantics and generally ignoring anyone else's points just to keep waving your dick around and try and prove that you have the moral superiority.

 

[Jumpman16]

Yes, it could possibly be legitimate, but the same can be said for Arceus. It might be legitimate... Nintendo might intend to release it tomorrow, so why shouldn't we use it? It could be possible, but when only a limited number has come out, it either is or isn't. Until you have proven that such a Pokemon exists, it is considered illegitimate.

reread the last sentence and tell me that we can state without any doubt that nintendo is releasing a 31/31/31/31/31/31 Arceus in all 17 natures. see how that works?

this argument would (and should) normally be met by "ok then darkrai and shaymin aren't legit either!" to which i would say "ok cool, start a thread about them" because i don't necessarily disagree but this thread isn't about them

Actually, it does whatever the hell it wants. Up until now, Arceus was completely legitimate in uber battles in the Official Server, despite it not being, according to you, legit.

you're confusing "present" with "legitimate". just because arceus was present on shoddy before does not mean it was legit. again, a "official simulator" usually strives to simulate the cartridges as accurately as possible. i can't speak for colin and his stance on arceus and darkrai and wish blissey and salamence so i won't, but i think there's a reason you don't see rapid spin tyranitar and bp snorlax on shoddy.

and in the future if you're responding to people in this thread you may want to quote them and the words you're replying to

 

[umbarsc]

@Jumpman

I would if I knew how to work with this weird BB code. Give me HTML!

reread the last sentence and tell me that we can state without any doubt that nintendo is releasing a 31/31/31/31/31/31 Arceus in all 17 natures. see how that works?

That's what I've been saying! You can't say without a doubt that these limited-supply Darkrais and such have max IVs with the nature you want until you've proven it. If you could possibly breed or soft-reset for one, it would be legitimate, but until you show us one with those qualities, it is illegitimate.

this argument would (and should) normally be met by "ok then darkrai and shaymin aren't legit either!" to which i would say "ok cool, start a thread about them" because i don't necessarily disagree but this thread isn't about them

Er... what in my post were you referring to?

you're confusing "present" with "legitimate". just because arceus was present on shoddy before does not mean it was legit. again, a "official simulator" usually strives to simulate the cartridges as accurately as possible. i can't speak for colin and his stance on arceus and darkrai and wish blissey and salamence so i won't, but i think there's a reason you don't see rapid spin tyranitar and bp snorlax on shoddy.

Actually, he was all for Arceus. He was debating it with Obi for quite a while on the chat, and he posted a link, which basically said that ShoddyBattle was using the game's coding to prove what was legitimate or not, not the developers or publishers. He instated the 'Extended Game Clause' just to end the controversy.

 

[Odinwolf]

I'm pretty shocked this debate is still raging. The solution is simple. Communicate with each other before you start a battle. If you don't specifically check the "Extended Game Clause" then make sure your team is prepared for Arceus. Problem solved. Good job Colin.

 

[umbarsc]

I'm pretty shocked this debate is still raging. The solution is simple. Communicate with each other before you start a battle. If you don't specifically check the "Extended Game Clause" then make sure your team is prepared for Arceus. Problem solved. Good job Colin.

The debate isn't "how do we solve the problem of Arceus's debatable legitimacy when facing an opponent", but rather "Is Arceus legitimate?". Problem solved, but the debate isn't.

 

[Kijin]

The debate isn't "how do we solve the problem of Arceus's debatable legitimacy when facing an opponent", but rather "Is Arceus legitimate?". Problem solved, but the debate isn't.

At this time, there is no legitimate way to get Arceus.
So,

 

[Odinwolf]

At this time, there is no legitimate way to get Arceus.
So,

So its possible that Arceus would be illegitimate on the cartridge and completely legit on the simulator. They are entirely different programs that are produced by entirely different programmers.

In reality, Shoddy isn't a "simulation" of the true Pokemon Diamond/Pearl battle system because there are all sorts of options that aren't available on the cartridges. Shoddy is actually a simulation of a theoretical and unrestricted metagame based on the Pokemon Diamond and Pearl cartridges. Considering its nature, it makes perfect sense for Arcreus to be considered legit on Shoddy.

 

[Namtar]

At this time, there is no legitimate way to get Arceus.
So,

Well, that depends on how "legitimate" is defined. And it seems that most of those definitions (the reasonable ones, at least) would also exclude Shaymin and possibly some other stuff.

I doubt any of the NYPC pokemon have maxed IV's.

 

[McCloudDash]

I'm pretty shocked this debate is still raging. The solution is simple. Communicate with each other before you start a battle. If you don't specifically check the "Extended Game Clause" then make sure your team is prepared for Arceus. Problem solved. Good job Colin.

that cluase would be fine, except its not one of those loved clauses that everyone agrees to like OHKO or DT. Basically, as you can plainly see, not everyone agrees that arceus should be disallowed, so who would want to give up a vital part of their team based on somebody else's opinion? Again, you can say that a skarmbliss ban is different from an arceus ban, but its not. The only difference is that in skarmbliss, thats your opinion unfair, and arceus, thats your opinion on the realm of legitimacy. Some people are black and white, some people have gray (grey?) areas, and i just think it is unfair that any person who's opinion is that arceus is legit, or rather semi-legit (and iirc, everyone is entitled to their own opinion), is forced to give into the other person's opinion (that arceus is completely illegal, if its hard to follow). Well, they're forced to give in if they ever have any hope to battle the other person that is. Despite this compromise of the extended game clause, freedoms are still lost, and that is what bugs me.

Cause come on, obi, what if some little kid worshipped you for your battling and it was his dream to one day battle you. So one day he sees you on competitor and wants to battle you, but you have the extended game clause on so he cant use arceus, which is the centerpiece of his team. But to him, arceus is legit. So what, your opinion is better than his then and it sucks to be him if he wont cooperate? so much for the fun in battling, then.

 

[umbarsc]

At this time, there is no legitimate way to get Arceus.
So,

There is a legitimate way to get Arceus. Go to Mt. Coronet, where you get Palkia and Dialga, and play your Azure Flute.

You'd be correct, however, if you said that there was no legit way to get the Azure Flute. Since that's the case, I declare we ban the Azure Flute on Shoddy.

 

[Surgo]

That's what I've been saying! You can't say without a doubt that these limited-supply Darkrais and such have max IVs with the nature you want until you've proven it.

For the 548375843758435th time, you can soft reset for the Darkrais.

 

[umbarsc]

For the 548375843758435th time, you can soft reset for the Darkrais.

You can? I thought you get them from an event. Or do you just get the item?