14,943
edits
Forum:Should there be a page for Fragmented Keys?: Difference between revisions
Forum:Should there be a page for Fragmented Keys? (edit)
Revision as of 14:26, 10 February 2021
, 3 years agoText replacement - "[[Kingdom Hearts Wiki:" to "[[KHWiki:"
No edit summary |
m (Text replacement - "[[Kingdom Hearts Wiki:" to "[[KHWiki:") |
||
| (47 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
:::The KHdecoded article appears to be a reader-submitted article, without factchecking oversight, and even the title casts doubt on the claims -- also, the art is pretty simple, and nothing about it sounds official. If there's no statement from a reliable source, someone not doing laughable "internet sleuthing", then this is an absolute no -- even the IGN article seems to be operating on hearsay. As a basic requirement, any ''reputable'' news source would be able to easily get an answer from Disney, GFL, or Square Enix instead of relying on a bullshit reddit post.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 19:57, 17 May 2015 (UTC) | :::The KHdecoded article appears to be a reader-submitted article, without factchecking oversight, and even the title casts doubt on the claims -- also, the art is pretty simple, and nothing about it sounds official. If there's no statement from a reliable source, someone not doing laughable "internet sleuthing", then this is an absolute no -- even the IGN article seems to be operating on hearsay. As a basic requirement, any ''reputable'' news source would be able to easily get an answer from Disney, GFL, or Square Enix instead of relying on a bullshit reddit post.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 19:57, 17 May 2015 (UTC) | ||
:::Hell, have any of the Kingdom Hearts fansites throwing away their reputation on this done a basic trademark patent search? Producers register tons of optional names before they put this much work into a thing, it is ludicrous to believe that they got to the concept art and story planning stage without staking claims on possible names.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 20:04, 17 May 2015 (UTC) | :::Hell, have any of the Kingdom Hearts fansites throwing away their reputation on this done a basic trademark patent search? Producers register tons of optional names before they put this much work into a thing, it is ludicrous to believe that they got to the concept art and story planning stage without staking claims on possible names.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 20:04, 17 May 2015 (UTC) | ||
::::Interesting, today's the first time I see this has actually gotten any attention. My understanding is different to the one expressed in KHInsider, though I remain equally skeptical. Based solely on what is expressed/written in the KH13 articles, from what I know, the entire concept of the game is based on the leaking of information by a "former developer" of the game, who posted this information on his personal LinkedIn profile. Then come all the blog links that supposedly were linked on his profile that housed the concept art. I became skeptical when I saw the concept art. Then there's the issue of ''Frozen'' being involved in the game, a game in planning nine months before ''Frozen'' had actually premiered. Not to mention, as KHInsider has noted, the concept art is really badly made. My explanation can be found on the KH13 article comments, to which [http://kh13.com/forum/topic/85201-concept-art-for-disneys-cancelled-iosandroid-kingdom-hearts-game-revealed-including-wreck-it-ralph-frozen-tangled-star-wars-worlds/?p=1621313 DChiuch strongly believed he there was a perfect explanation for it]. There does appear that a game (different from this one) was in development at about the same time, but I think that while that one is more probable to have existed, this one...not so much. It is my belief that the game never existed, and KH13 is the sad victim of a scam levied against the ''Kingdom Hearts'' community, probably for the purpose of upping up the scammers own resumes (Kinda wish that the this kinda publication had been given to [[ | ::::Interesting, today's the first time I see this has actually gotten any attention. My understanding is different to the one expressed in KHInsider, though I remain equally skeptical. Based solely on what is expressed/written in the KH13 articles, from what I know, the entire concept of the game is based on the leaking of information by a "former developer" of the game, who posted this information on his personal LinkedIn profile. Then come all the blog links that supposedly were linked on his profile that housed the concept art. I became skeptical when I saw the concept art. Then there's the issue of ''Frozen'' being involved in the game, a game in planning nine months before ''Frozen'' had actually premiered. Not to mention, as KHInsider has noted, the concept art is really badly made. My explanation can be found on the KH13 article comments, to which [http://kh13.com/forum/topic/85201-concept-art-for-disneys-cancelled-iosandroid-kingdom-hearts-game-revealed-including-wreck-it-ralph-frozen-tangled-star-wars-worlds/?p=1621313 DChiuch strongly believed he there was a perfect explanation for it]. There does appear that a game (different from this one) was in development at about the same time, but I think that while that one is more probable to have existed, this one...not so much. It is my belief that the game never existed, and KH13 is the sad victim of a scam levied against the ''Kingdom Hearts'' community, probably for the purpose of upping up the scammers own resumes (Kinda wish that the this kinda publication had been given to [[KHWiki:Kingdom Hearts -3D HD ReMIX-|our "scam"/prank]]). {{KeybladeSpyMaster/Sig}} 00:46, 18 May 2015 (UTC) | ||
{{TNE|time=10:46, 18 May 2015 (UTC)|text=What would really help, right about now, is if Disney or SE actually issued an official statement either supporting or refuting this, so we know once and for all. That might happen, I don't know, several months from now... but it would really be appreciated. Not for our sake, of course, because we're not buying it -- but for the sake of the hundreds who have gone gaga for it, not knowing if it is a scam or not.}} | {{TNE|time=10:46, 18 May 2015 (UTC)|text=What would really help, right about now, is if Disney or SE actually issued an official statement either supporting or refuting this, so we know once and for all. That might happen, I don't know, several months from now... but it would really be appreciated. Not for our sake, of course, because we're not buying it -- but for the sake of the hundreds who have gone gaga for it, not knowing if it is a scam or not.}} | ||
| Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
::::Plenty of things are real and not trademarked. In fact, only "KINGDOM HEARTS" and "KINGDOM HEARTS CHAIN OF MEMORIES" are trademarked in the US, none of the other games appear on trademark databases (you can verify this on uspto.gov). Also, they wouldn't trademark a secret title until they were sure that they were going to release it. Not sure why you'd think that it has to be trademarked to be real. It also wouldn't be easy to contact SE or Disney about it, since not many companies are happy to openly talk about secret, unannounced and cancelled projects. --[[User:DChiuch|DChiuch]] ([[User talk:DChiuch|talk]]) 13:04, 29 April 2016 (UTC) | ::::Plenty of things are real and not trademarked. In fact, only "KINGDOM HEARTS" and "KINGDOM HEARTS CHAIN OF MEMORIES" are trademarked in the US, none of the other games appear on trademark databases (you can verify this on uspto.gov). Also, they wouldn't trademark a secret title until they were sure that they were going to release it. Not sure why you'd think that it has to be trademarked to be real. It also wouldn't be easy to contact SE or Disney about it, since not many companies are happy to openly talk about secret, unannounced and cancelled projects. --[[User:DChiuch|DChiuch]] ([[User talk:DChiuch|talk]]) 13:04, 29 April 2016 (UTC) | ||
::::::But it doesn't really change the fact that we have next to nothing to go on, and the little that we do have is hilariously suspect. I'm fairly open-minded; I believe this has just as much of a possibility to be real than fake, but to side with the | :::::Admittedly, I'm not a trademark law buff, but I was able to find more than just KH and CoM. | ||
*[http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4804:mjnyhu.2.2 Birth by sleep], filed just a few days after the game was announced in Japan. | |||
*[http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4804:mjnyhu.10.1 358/2 Days], filed at the same time. | |||
*(Incidentally, CoM is trademarked as "Kingdom Hearts Chain of Memories" because [http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4804:mjnyhu.18.2 a trademark for "Chain of Memories" already existed].) | |||
:I can't find Unchained or coded, but those are also super-generic words that Disney may have not been able to trademark. Almost all of them are [http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?Search_Arg=kingdom+hearts&Search_Code=TALL&PID=2JwhKssxez4cj2q7oYxTqx1ASrrlE&SEQ=20160429120501&CNT=25&HIST=1 copyrighted], too. Fragmented Keys produces no hits. | |||
:[https://www.linkedin.com/in/rpeeler This guy] was the one who arranged for us to participate in the launch of KH3D. Why not just send him an e-mail, asking if he is able to discuss the matter? He, or whoever he refers you to, may not be able to actually give specifics, but you can trust they wouldn't outright lie about whether there were specifics to be had.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 16:18, 29 April 2016 (UTC) | |||
::::::Oops my mistake, you're right – there are some trademarks for other games, but still, not all of them, so the lack of a trademark isn't evidence. It's neither here nor there that "Fragmented Keys" has no hits on the trademark database. It makes sense that they wouldn't want to register it at the trademark office until it was officially announced, they wouldn't want to reveal the game that way. I know that some game announcements get leaked this way, but this is relatively rare. | |||
::::::I don't think he would be the best person to contact as Fragmented Keys seems to have been 100% a Disney thing, similar to KH V-Cast, with no involvement from Square. It would be better to contact some of the people from Wideload Games / Disney who list the game on their CVs. Still, even without doing this it's a certainty that this game existed. --[[User:DChiuch|DChiuch]] ([[User talk:DChiuch|talk]]) 17:31, 29 April 2016 (UTC) | |||
::::::But it doesn't really change the fact that we have next to nothing to go on, and the little that we do have is hilariously suspect. I'm fairly open-minded; I believe this has just as much of a possibility to be real than fake, but to side with the real bit I'd need more evidence that what we currently have. --[[User:Webber22|Webber22]] ([[User talk:Webber22|talk]]) 16:12, 29 April 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::::::The evidence that I outlined a few posts up is absolutely solid, I see no reason to doubt it. If it was a single piece of evidence, maybe, but we have multiple sources of evidence that can all be cross-referenced, and that are all very solid if you look into it. --[[User:DChiuch|DChiuch]] ([[User talk:DChiuch|talk]]) 17:31, 29 April 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::Sorry man, but that stuff is just too easy to fake. :( A couple of years ago, I trolled the FF community regarding a Type-0 stateside release, with all the bells and whistles. If you want the confirmed existence of something that is dubious, you need at least three individual sources that can be corroborated, preferably in direct contact - ideally, each contact assigned to a different person. To further make it concrete, these contacts should all be consulted by different sites. Fragmented Keys was only covered by you guys, only has a single contact with an extremely suspect portfolio to begin with, and the included "screenshot" contains JPEG artifacts forming a sort of "halo" around the logo - something that can only come from image editing resources. In contrast, an actual game screenshot would utilize image compression with the same pixel ratio as the rest of the individual assets on the image, even IF compressed to a JPEG resolution, like Famitsu does. Like I said man, I pulled this stunt before myself and I can recognize it a mile away. :< But all the same, I'm all for putting up a page - IF we can get enough concrete evidence on it. This is a wiki based on factual information, so for all intents and purposes, we follow the rules of journalistic integrity...right? So, there are certain standards we gotta abide by. Ask any other site out there, from KHInsider, to KH-Vids - it doesn't even HAVE to be KH oriented, and they'll tell you the same thing. Pete Campbell from KHU now works as a professional editor and AT consultant; he'll tell you the same thing. And I ''know'' you know him and are cool with him. --[[User:Webber22|Webber22]] ([[User talk:Webber22|talk]]) 20:07, 29 April 2016 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::It would be easy to fake some content, sure – but it's NOT easy to get 11 Disney employees to list the title on their LinkedIn, to get a major animation studio (GFL Animation) to list the game and concept art on their LinkedIn and websites, and to get a confirmed Disney beta tester to post a fake screenshot on reddit. Absolutely none of that would be easy to do. Tell me how ANY of those could be faked, and then tell me how they can ALL be fake together, it's just impossible. | |||
::::::::::You are trying to disprove the whole thing by pointing out little quality things, while addressing none of the solid evidence. It's not just a single source, in addition to the GFL Animation thing and the person from the Disney beta testing program, we also have all of these employees: [there's the first one that removed their profile, he requested that I remove him from this story so I won't link to him] [https://www.linkedin.com/in/rrivera 2] [https://www.linkedin.com/in/steve-sengele-32232929?authType=name&authToken=AM9Y&trk=prof-proj-cc-name 3] [https://www.linkedin.com/in/tom-watson-88420b65?authType=name&authToken=hC27&trk=prof-proj-cc-name 4] [https://www.linkedin.com/in/tomketola?authType=name&authToken=Q_L8&trk=prof-proj-cc-name 5] [https://www.linkedin.com/in/daniel-loane-86286912?authType=name&authToken=aKBd&trk=prof-proj-cc-name 6] [https://www.linkedin.com/in/danladuca?authType=name&authToken=4B8Y&trk=prof-proj-cc-name 7] [https://www.linkedin.com/in/rolandherran?authType=name&authToken=b-RF&trk=prof-proj-cc-name 8] [https://www.linkedin.com/in/cedric-busse-45661b?authType=name&authToken=zGzw&trk=prof-proj-cc-name 9]. Note that some of these people list it as "Unannounced Mobile Game for Disney Interactive", while some multiple the exact same project as "Kingdom Hearts Fragmented Keys", they can all be cross-referenced. Tell me that ALL of these profiles are fake (even though they go years back and are linked to from the employees other social media channels) AND that GFL Animation Studios is fake (even though they appear in the credits for several motion pictures, and that their Kingdom Hearts Fragmented Keys concept art page was online multiple months before this story ever broke). Just saying "oh this pixel here is off" or "this is terrible DeviantART quality" is not an argument for it being fake, unless you address all of this solid evidence and provide an alternate explanation. | |||
::::::::::PS: I find your comments about journalistic integrity bizarre. I don't have to ask other sites to know journalistic integrity exists and is important, obviously we know that and it plays a role in KH13. That's why we did our due diligence in researching the story, considered the possibility that it could be fake, found that it couldn't and only then reported the story, laying all of the evidence out there. Does it matter that I know Pete, and that he has a respectable profession with standards? I could tell you all my real life stuff and career but let's not make this about reputation, let's actually examine the evidence. --[[User:DChiuch|DChiuch]] ([[User talk:DChiuch|talk]]) 06:20, 30 April 2016 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::::If there's anything bizarre about this is how hilariously defensive and militant you are about this. I'm saying ''consult Pete''. Let someone ''professional'' examine the evidence. Technically speaking, ''I'm'' capable of doing that - but like you said, I won't enter my reputation or work life into this. Not to mention I have biases about this, even if I admit I'm fairly open-minded about the possibility. :/ --[[User:Webber22|Webber22]] ([[User talk:Webber22|talk]]) 07:09, 30 April 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::::::Guys, we need to stop getting heated about this. Let's cool down. | |||
:::::::::::::DChiuch, I think the wiki, per the discussion above, would be happy to cover Fragmented Keys if we can get an official statement from someone with authority still working at Disney. That's the main sticking point, it sounds like. Can we please make an attempt to contact Disney itself?{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 14:31, 2 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::::::I'll encourage the News Team at KH13 to contact some Disney and Wideload Games people, and try and get an official confirmation. But I wouldn't expect results, not many companies like to talk about their cancelled games – they were cancelled for a reason, after all. Actually the original Disney employee who requested that I remove his name from the article (and out of respect for that I don't think any of us should name), in their email to me, stressed that employees are not allowed to confirm or deny anything that was not announced by Disney themselves, and could get into trouble by doing so, so I really don't think this will go anywhere. --[[User:DChiuch|DChiuch]] ([[User talk:DChiuch|talk]]) 07:50, 3 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::Honestly, even them saying "It's theoretically possible that work was done on this title" would be a step forward. Not related to this topic, but internet sleuthing has left a bad taste in my mouth recently, and I'd much rather we have some sort of tolerable statement from an official source to use before going forward.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 13:36, 3 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
I think that we should have a "Cancelled titles" page, since there's also things like the TV series. {{User:TheFifteenthMember/Sig1}} 20:11, 2 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
:That could work! Since we have so little to go on for every individual project, I think it's a great idea to lump them into a single page. --[[User:Webber22|Webber22]] ([[User talk:Webber22|talk]]) 20:27, 2 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
::If we can't find proof of it being an actual title, can't we have a page called "Rumored Games" or something that lists games like this one? {{User:TheSilentHero/Sig}} 17:58, 3 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::What else would even go on it? Erg...I guess we could have it on a "cancelled games" page, ''provided'' we make the earnest effort to get official comment, and disclaim it with a template similar to 'translation' stating that the veracity of the claims are under dispute, and the reader should make their own decision from the evidence present. Personally, I ''really'' don't like doing this kind of thing, when we've made it a point in the past to not even accept rumors about VAs or new features in games until we get official documentation.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 18:09, 3 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::The problem with "rumored games" is that it would end up into a circus. You'll have droves of people adding all sorts of crap to it. Remember, "Kingdom Hearts: Final Dive" was a "rumored" game for a long time - yet it was as bona fide as any April Fools page here. As I said, I'm all for clumping cancelled stuff into a single page. But reiterating Kryten here and myself from a wee bit up above, there ''still'' isn't anything substantial - anything that can't be faked - that proves this was a real thing. And I know emailing SE directly would result in the automated response of "We don't comment on rumors and speculation." So....if someone is feeling ''brave'', there's E3 in just two months. I'm pretty certain Tae Yasue will show up to promote Unchained and 2.8, and I'm even ''more'' certain Churro will be there. That's pretty much the best chance to know whether this was a real thing to begin with. --[[User:Webber22|Webber22]] ([[User talk:Webber22|talk]]) 07:26, 4 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
{{TheFifteenthMember|time={{User:TheFifteenthMember/Sig1}} 18:51, 4 May 2016 (UTC)|default=This is a new direction that I'd be interested to see the wiki taking. Originally, I pitched this plan to the Keyhole, where they'd focus on "out-of-universe" information related to Kingdom Hearts, including culture and events. Since they've opted for the simplified KHWiki purpose instead, I wonder if we could integrate some of my ideas into this wiki. | |||
We are the Kingdom Hearts Wiki and our mission purpose is to "document '''all''' things related to Kingdom Hearts" (emphasise mine), so I don't see why we can't cover major KH rumours, interviews, events etc. Even if that information isn't relevant to the games, it would be cool to document ''Kingdom Hearts'' history. As a fan, I'd sure appreciate it if in five years time, I could look back and see all the interesting things that happened in the past. This sort of content can be easily lumped into a few list articles, mainly segregated from the rest of the wiki, so I don't see any harm in our encyclopedia storing valid information related to KH. | |||
Therefore, I support a "Rumoured games" article with all the necessary disclaimers. In response to Webber's argument against it, I think that only rumours posted by major sites (IGN, Gamespot, any other website we take as an official source) since those are the only ones that I'd deem worthy or significant enough to be covered. }} | |||
:"so I don't see why we can't cover major KH rumours, interviews, events etc." -- Events and interviews? Absolutely! We already have guidelines that those ''should'' be covered, it's just that almost no one has the time or desire to make the necessary articles. But rumors? No, because if you don't police that stuff for notability, it very quickly becomes a total shitshow of "here's a thing my cousin swears is true." Hell, even the Zelda Wiki had to ditch all the "theories" sections they had been allowing, because people were abusing them to just be "I think this, even though it flagrantly contradicts canon."{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 19:05, 4 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
::As I said, only rumours reported by official sites will be covered. Also, rumours are very different from theories. I'm talking about covering encyclopaedic information, not anything subject to conjecture. {{User:TheFifteenthMember/Sig1}} 19:20, 4 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::What are you defining as an official site...?{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 19:45, 4 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
::::Any site we already deem trustworthy enough to get news, such as release dates. {{User:TheFifteenthMember/Sig1}} 20:01, 4 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
::::But here's the thing - if an "official" site, like IGN reports on rumors, the ugly truth is, those rumors will ALWAYS be sourced back to a fansite of some sort! It always happens. KHInsider were the first ones to report on "Kingdom Hearts 2.9", followed swiftly by IGN and Siliconera. Of course, that turned out to be misinformation - it was 2.''8'', and has some notable differences from the rumored 2.9. IGN isn't so much as a news source as it is a ''news aggregate''. Name one time IGN had an "exclusive rumor." You won't find it lol. Sites like IGN, Siliconera, Kotaku, etc, they just go around and collect shit posted on other, bigger sites and share them with a wider audience - if it's an exclusive, it'll state as much. And site exclusives are about the only reliable and legit official sources you can use - everything else just comes from tweets, message boards, or fansites - hardly verified sources. So, even with stuff like IGN, you're gonna need some digging - have to have ''some'' way to trace the rumor back to an official - i.e. Square-Enix affiliated - source. Otherwise, like Kryten said, it'll just turn into a shitshow. "Only verified sites like IGN are allowed in the rumor section." "But! But...IGN originally got it from KH13!!!" Stuff like that will happen. All the time. You overestimate this fanbase's adherence to responsibility lol. There's as much wishful thinking in this community as there is in the Sonic fanbase, and the moment you enter rumors into it, it all goes south. And you know what? ''Even I'm not above it!'' If you introduce this section without a proper level of discretion, ''I guarantee you'', at some point in the future ''I'll'' end up trolling all of you with some seriously convincing shit spread all over the interwebz. For the longest time, I had Xenosaga fans and Nintendo fans and even IGN fooled into thinking a Xenosaga HD collection was headed to the Wii U lol. ''Don't allow evil men like me prevail!'' --[[User:Webber22|Webber22]] ([[User talk:Webber22|talk]]) 21:22, 4 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::::I'm not sure why it's so complicated. The actual validity of the claim is irrelevant. For our purpose, we're not claiming that what these sources are saying is correct, we're just saying that these things were said. It doesn't matter where the official site (let's carry on using the IGN example) got their info from, all it means is that this rumour appeared on a big shot website, so it's important enough to document. It's a criteria that decides which rumours are added and not. As long as we have a list of sources we deem official (and that resource would be useful for VAs and release dates too), I don't see anyway in which the page could fill up with random rubbish, so long as we're enforcing the policies. {{User:TheFifteenthMember/Sig1}} 22:18, 4 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
::::::Again, I'm not entirely sure it's a good idea. Especially the fact that we ''know'' it's rubbish, yet we still let it hang around just because it follows our guidelines. I mean...exception like that are the very reason our current world is as fucked up as it is. Things that follow rules shouldn't have to be flexible in order to fall within them, it's the ''rules'' that are supposed to be flexible enough to begin with. That goes both ways. Let's see what the others think. To summarize, my stance is that we '''should''' have a page(s) on cancelled projects, provided we have sufficient sources, but '''not''' on rumors. --[[User:Webber22|Webber22]] ([[User talk:Webber22|talk]]) 00:38, 5 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
::::::::[http://www.ssbwiki.com/List_of_rumors Like SmashWiki,] I think we should only allow rumors that are believed to be true by a large part of the community, like Fragmented Keys and 2.9 were. We can avoid users adding random rumors by protecting the page, so they would have to bring it up on the talk page first. {{User:TheSilentHero/Sig}} 13:44, 5 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::But what ''part'' of the community? We're kind of divided, sad to say. Most of the folks on KH13 would believe anything they read. The people on KHInsider can be more skeptical than even us. And Gamefaqs and Neogaf....let's not even go there. --[[User:Webber22|Webber22]] ([[User talk:Webber22|talk]]) 15:58, 5 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::::Maybe just this community. If we discuss every rumor on the talk page first, we can add the ones that we believe in. {{User:TheSilentHero/Sig}} 16:36, 5 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
Reiterating the point that the page is NOT necessarily for rumours that ''we'' believe in. It's for rumours that haven't been fully validated and has been spread across an official site. At no point in the article, will we say that these rumours are actually true. {{User:TheFifteenthMember/Sig1}} | |||
:I really can't picture a working version of this. Would you care to work up a draft, before we make decisions?{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 19:08, 5 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
I agree with Webber on this point. I don't see the value in talking about "rumours", ie. things that could be made up. I think that's too close to cataloging fan-made stuff, which is outside of the scope of this wiki. I think we should consider the evidence on each rumour individually and only write about the ones that are solid. Also on the point of "What website counts as a source? Does a KH fansite? Does IGN?", I think again we should ignore the reputation of the reporting website and instead look at the specific evidence, and just consider the legitimacy of the actual source of the evidence. --[[User:DChiuch|DChiuch]] ([[User talk:DChiuch|talk]]) 04:06, 6 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
:But....the whole point - practically the ''definition'' - to rumors is that they ''aren't'' solid. The....uhm, solidity, is what separates rumors from facts. --[[User:Webber22|Webber22]] ([[User talk:Webber22|talk]]) 19:52, 6 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
Pardon for extending an already extended conversation, but I found the background artist's website, which I'm not sure has been brought up before. Owen Rohu is an Irish matte painter who's worked at Disney, and currently freelances. | |||
http://www.owenrohu.com/digital-paintings.html | |||
This page from his website features the WIR, L&S, Agrabah, Neverland, Grid and SW backgrounds, all labelled as "Disney Gaming Environment", slightly mixed with his Angry Birds backgrounds. | |||
The kicker is that I found it through googling Traverse Town images. There was actually a Traverse Town background, of the same flattened style (though seemingly incomplete), up on the website that for whatever reason has since been removed. The preview should still be brought up in Google if you search "owenrohu traverse town", though the original image can't be recovered. On top of that, http://www.filmmayo.ie/directory/owen-rohu lists him as working on "Kingdom Hearts", which would support the Traverse Town image's existence. | |||
I'm pondering if this has any value whatsoever towards proving or disproving the rumour, since he does have some legitimate Disney credits. | |||
[[Special:Contributions/195.171.114.174|195.171.114.174]] 11:17, 9 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
:Does he list contact information?{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 12:50, 9 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
::Pardon for the computer switch. His contact button's at the right side of the site header. There's also a button to his LinkedIn, which says he was working at Trilabyrinth between 2012 and 2014 as a freelancer doing "gaming environments for Disney and Lucas Arts". Going to the Trilabyrinth page brings up their 2014 company reel which includes the Star Wars backgrounds shared by both Rohu and GFL Productions in the "PREvis" section of the video. [[Special:Contributions/82.36.144.164|82.36.144.164]] 17:32, 9 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::Okay, someone should contact him.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 22:49, 9 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
See, now ''this'' is a bit more of that solidity I was talking about. Though, I have to note that the Traverse Town matte image search is a no-go. His work page has also been web archived, and nothing. --[[User:Webber22|Webber22]] ([[User talk:Webber22|talk]]) 23:56, 9 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
:It doesn't come up as a regular search result, is the thing. I found it by coincidence via Google's 'related images' when looking at the First District picture from the wikia, which was what led me to his page in the first place. If I hadn't recognised the SW and L&S backgrounds that were still up, I never would've made the connection. | |||
:I offer a screencap of the search result here, which matches one of the sketches from the 'Game Hubs' section of KH13's upload:<br /> | |||
:[http://s640.photobucket.com/user/UMIYURI/media/Screen%20Shot%202016-05-10%20at%2008.31.42.png.html http://i640.photobucket.com/albums/uu121/UMIYURI/th_Screen%20Shot%202016-05-10%20at%2008.31.42.png] [http://kh13.com/forum/uploads/gallery/album_1224/med_gallery_1_1224_136867.jpg http://kh13.com/forum/uploads/gallery/album_1224/tn_gallery_1_1224_136867.jpg] | |||
[[Special:Contributions/82.36.144.164|82.36.144.164]] 07:44, 10 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
::That...seems to the point. Who's going to be contacting him? --[[User:Webber22|Webber22]] ([[User talk:Webber22|talk]]) 14:02, 10 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::Looking for Trilabyrinth, incidentally, their website also has concepts for New Town here: http://www.trilabyrinth.com/portfolio/2d-3d-props-assets/ | |||
:::Three-dimensional Disney sets from the world list we have are here: http://www.trilabyrinth.com/portfolio/3dsets/ | |||
:::And all these Disney sketches, including again that part of the Death Star: http://www.trilabyrinth.com/portfolio/design-work/ | |||
:::Most of this was not part of the GFL leak. | |||
:::It's worth a note that a few of these concepts are for separate Star Wars projects and a few others are for Epic Mickey, but the difference between them is particularly stark. [[Special:Contributions/82.36.144.164|82.36.144.164]] 06:40, 12 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
::::Update: Rohu has '''password-protected his front page and digital paintings gallery''' as of today. [[Special:Contributions/82.36.144.164|82.36.144.164]] 21:29, 13 May 2016 (UTC) | |||