Thread:DukeLeto7/@comment-27713488-20171127053659/@comment-27713488-20180205022647

The rule predates me, so I'm not sure about this but: I think the purpose of that rule is so that people can speculate on a more-or-less even playing field and it's not just a priestly caste of hackers peering into the database for omens and portents, which may turn out not to even be right when they come to pass and something got changed late in development. And tossing out other people's ideas in the process, intentionally or not, ruining their fun. Does that help? DukeLeto7 wrote: Yeah, I don't think that's a reasonable interpretation. It would be pretty artificial to restrict people from speculating based on stuff recorded in wiki articles. Yes, the existence of that event causes a dilemma because ordinarily there isn't a huge reason to record tentative future game mechanics in wiki articles. If we considered the speculation thread the most sacrosanct thing on the wiki, we'd have had to put a moratorium on mining that event, treating it like we treat new stuff in unreleased patron builds. But we don't, because the wiki is at least as much for optimizers' benefit as others'. As it is, it's sort of okay to talk about it because it's all in a wiki article anyway. As it stands, I think another reason that I'm having confusion is the ambiguity on the word "files", because it could be interpreted to mean the files distributed with the game executable rather than the code one can access by decrypting the rgss3a file. It doesn't just mean the code, it also means graphical assets and stuff. If you're wondering whether it's okay to speculate based on something you saw in the readme, then, er, that's fine.
 * If the rule is not to discuss anything that can't be encountered through the game interface, then we can't mention hidden stats at all.
 * If the rule is not to discuss anything that is in the game code but can't be accessed in an ordinary playthrough yet, the future investment returns in the Ch 4 iterate event are out.