The pastebin link below contains many, many alleged spoilers for the Indigo Disk DLC for Pokémon Scarlet and Violet. But is it legit?
Resolves YES if the majority (50%+) of this information is proved to be accurate at the release of the DLC. Resolves NO if the majority is found to be not correct on launch.
Don’t click if you’re not into spoilers, obviously, and please don’t post spoilers in the comments section before launch.
Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ68 | |
| 2 | Ṁ40 | |
| 3 | Ṁ1 |
@Noit I think it's ready to be resolved as "NO" :D
• The Pokédex numbers were wrong for 1020, 1021, 1022, and 1023,
• The typing was wrong on 1019 and WILDLY wrong on 1024a, 1024b, AND 1024c,
• The names were incorrect on 1021, 1023, and 1025 (AND the Spanish names were wrong too on 1021 and 1023) - and partially wrong on 1020 (like, ouch, haha, the "leaker" went for the obvious guess on that name and they STILL got it slightly wrong),
• The name of 1024c's form is completely incorrect (and probably a veiled Marvel reference lol),
• The mechanics of the "Jewel" situation were incorrect,
• The "Jewel" name was completely incorrect (and incorrect in EVERY language they listed)
• 1007 and 1008 didn't receive any additional forms, especially not "Jewel" ones.
And that's just the issues in the FIRST PAGE ALONE.
My one worry with this post is the 50% rule.
Like, if most things are MOSTLY-incorrect, BUT this "leaker" just used pre-existing information we were ALREADY near-sure of (like a hydra-themed Dipplin evo, a Paradox Entei and Terrakion, and a peach/momotaro-themed Mythical), but they sorta-kinda get MOST of the names wrong and moves wrong because that's the part the "leaker" is guessing on — will it still hopefully be resolved as "NO" since most correct aspects would be "stuff we'd already gotten confirmed from other verifiable leakers"?
@PaintspotInfez I’m going to go through every “fact” that we don’t already know with a marker. So if e.g. they get a stat distribution and a name right, that’s two points in favour, if the moves exist but names are wrong that’s one point against (name) and one point for (description of effect). If they’re legit then I’d hope that they didn’t fluke a 50% misinfo rate. If it’s close then I might post the highlighted text for discussion.
@Noit Ah, you're going to only be looking at the stuff we DIDN'T already know from other reliable leakers. That's a huge relief to know — thank you! :D
@PaintspotInfez Well, if it turns out there is no peach Pokémon or paradox Entei (seems a given at this point) then it’ll count against.