# Talk:Pokémon fan games

@Pokelego999: Would you have an objection to moving the page to Pokémon fan games to match the category? It also uses the more common term of "fan game" rather than "fan-made game".  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:23, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@Zxcvbnm I do feel it would be a bit of a misnomer, as this article covers both ROM hacks of Pokémon games and Pokémon fangames, which are identified by sources as being two separate, albeit very closely associated, things. ROM hacks don't fall under the same label, and I feel it may be confusing for readers searching for info on ROM hacks to find it an article about fangames, which are considered separate things under the wider scope of fan-made Pokémon games.   Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 14:46, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
@Pokelego999: By that logic, a ROM hack would also not qualify as a "fan-made game". ROM hacks are merely video game mods that utilize an existing game as a basis.
Possibly, we could agree on Pokémon fan games and mods.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:02, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
@Zxcvbnm ROM hacks are considered by the sources in the article to be produced and made by fans, so they very much still fall under the category of a "fan-made game". Either way, my gripe is moreso in the confusion with the title than it is anything else, as I feel some confusion may arise from the similar titles when someone is searching for this subject. If you feel very strongly about this new title's effectiveness (Fan-games and mods), then I am not outright opposed to it, but I do feel the current title is just more concise in its coverage of the subjects. The current title should also probably be kept as a redirect to the new page if it is moved.  Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 15:40, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

The section about Pokémon Infinite Fusion sources TheGamer as one of the sources [1], but this website states that you can download the game on IOS, and that the game is downloaded from a website, which are both not true (there is a fake website pretending to be the official thing that has a scuffed download), so I consider this an unreliable source. Is there some kind of tag that can be added to an unreliable source before a new source is found to replace it? --MystiiFlareon2 (talk) 19:30, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

@MystiiFlareon2 a single mistake doesn't make a source entirely unreliable. This information is also irrelevant to the actual subject matter of the article, as the download information is not mentioned on the Wikipedia article, so I don't believe this is a significant problem.   Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 19:57, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Pokémon fan games/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Pokelego999 (talk · contribs) 20:28, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Cukie Gherkin (talk · contribs) 18:08, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Legal issues

I suggest changing from "parent company," as looking it up, that's not a term I see used to describe the relationship between the two companies elsewhere.
Let me know if the current wording is alright or should be changed. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:00, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
Regarding Tutty's comments, is he stating this as something he knows to be true, or is it just his opinion on why it is done?
Is Morrison a Nintendo/TPC lawyer, or an uninvolved lawyer?
On both Morrison and Tutty: Both seem to be uninvolved but both seem to be legal experts who would be qualified to comment on this, hence why they were consulted by WIRED and PC Gamer, so I don't see an issue with using them. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:00, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
I feel like "do not go after many games directly" and "Legal action is frequently threatened against both modifications of pre-existing Pokémon games and fangames" may contradict each other
Tried shifting some stuff around to clarify a bit. Both give conflicting accounts so I tried to reflect that a bit better. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:00, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
@Cukie Gherkin: addressed the above comments. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:00, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
Spotcheck

[2] - Gets the date wrong for Crystal Clear (typo I assume)
@Cukie Gherkin: Fixed. Good catch on the typo. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 18:07, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

[3] Looks good
[4] Looks good
[5] Looks good
Passing - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 18:46, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

  Y Merge completed Klbrain (talk) 16:27, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

So here's a weird conundrum: there is discussion about this game as an unofficial Pokemon bit of content, and while one could argue there is fan effort behind it...it's a bootleg game developed by a "company" that is generating revenue, and some concerns have been raised if it's valid for a list about fan games. At the same time though, there is at least enough discussion about the thing that it should go *somewhere*, just nowhere near enough for an article lest we create a permastub/perma-Start. Currently it's on the page, but wanting to make sure everyone's good with that. Kung Fu Man (talk) 23:19, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

I've already discussed this off-wiki, but I do feel as though it's not a "fan-game" per se. As you say, it's a notable-ish piece of unofficial media, but isn't exactly a game made by fans. I'll let some others weigh their thoughts, but I do feel it doesn't really fit in with the article's current content.  Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 23:24, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
that is quite possibly the nicest way of saying that someone is only in it for the dosh consarn (formerly cogsan) 11:09, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
as is, i'd say leave it here in absence of a "pokémon bootlegs" article (and of pokémon reborn). for better or worse (definitely worse), it's got citations behind it consarn (formerly cogsan) 11:11, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
You can still generate revenue off a fangame, so I don't see how that makes a difference?  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:24, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
I think Poke's concern was more does it count as a fangame still if it's made with the intention of generating revenue versus the usual definition of fangame.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 13:09, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
to sort of answer that, one could look into the touhou fanbase. i hear lostword has a yearly revenue of at least 14 yen, and i see no argument against it counting as a fangame. thus, if it counts, a game being made by fans and being made to print funny-looking paper aren't necessarily intrinsically related, meaning the real argument would be whether or not pocket incoming's devs are fans consarn (speak evil) (see evil) 13:31, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
That was my argument to begin with. It's unofficial content, but it doesn't seem to be made by fans per se.  Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 13:11, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
to my disappointment (80% of which is owed to how they butchered gardevoir), that's a question we can't really answer without sauce, but might have to assume is "it's a bible fangame" until further notice consarn (speak evil) (see evil) 13:17, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

i have a bit of an idea for a section on the different levels on which each type of console based game is being romhacked
made (for example, how 3ds games cant be map edited yet but the gba ones are fully re-doable) would that fit this article or should it be used for a different one? PunkishToxtricity (talk) 04:47, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

If you can find secondary, reliable sources covering this subject, then that is something worth discussing for inclusion. I did not find much myself when I did my initial search for this article, hence why it's not in there, but let me know if you turn anything up. If the coverage is reliable I'd be happy to help with how to include that kind of info in the article.  Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 17:34, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
all i found on citra is this [6]source, cant find much on the other console emulators PunkishToxtricity (talk) 23:25, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

might wanna ping @Beandaddyo for this, since it's a little on the complicated side
while your attempts to add reborn are good and i support them, the unfortunate reality from looking at the sources is that... it kinda doesn't meet any standard of notability yet. let's just go through the sources currently used as of writing this

the ign southeast asia article: it's a ranking, its pokémon fan game entry is actually rejuvenation, it calls rejuv a sequel to reborn (it's not, it only references reborn and desolation here and there) with sprites styled after gen 5 (they're styled after gen 3), and in a detail that's way funnier than it probably should be, already has some old-ass screenshots, that'll probably be even more outdated when the game is complete. honestly, while almost usable, even if it was actually usable for rejuv, i'd stay away from it on the basis of it being wrong
the thegamer article: i mean... i guess? it's also just a ranking, but it's actually about reborn this time (and rejuv is there too). kinda bugs me that fields are compared to weather as opposed to terrains, but whatever, this one probably gets a pass i think maybe don't quote me on this
the softonic whatever that is: i have no idea. is it a ranking of sites or games? it seems to be both, but it ranks... the game? the site isn't called "pokémon reborn", it's called "reborn, evolved", and emuparadise is the only actual unambiguous site there... what do i even make of that other than "it's not usable lol"?
i guess my point is, reborn still needs time to achieve notability, which i'm not entirely sure can happen with a game as big as it is that also happens to be over 20 seconds old. i'll leave it to someone else to evaluate those sources themselves and remove it if they see it unfit, but i very likely would remove it again
on an unrelated note about pulse pokémon ("pulse" being an acronym, not a word), they only functioned like megas around e18, with a "pulse" item that was unused in 19.16 and later scrapped entirely in 19.5, with it only being usable for one of the tangrowth before being removed entirely. of course, this resulted in pulses having vacant item slots, but surely cass wouldn't do anything evil with that... right? consarn (grave) (obituary) 13:16, 13 May 2025 (UTC)