Please remember to follow the manual of style and code of conduct at all times.
Check BNN and Bulbanews for up-to-date Pokémon news and discuss it on the forums or in our IRC channel #bulbagarden on


From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Revision as of 22:22, 27 January 2013 by Igor Castro Chucre (Talk | contribs) (Key Items)

Jump to: navigation, search

Worthy as an article on Bulbapedia?

I HATE cheaters! Unless it's to get an Event Pokemon you can't get otherwise... then I suppose it's alright. Actually, I also use "walk anywhere" from time to time, just because it's fun. User: Ph34rshallriseagain

I HATE cheaters! Except when I'm one.
We still should have an article about it, if that's why you brought up the subject...
Random subject is random? 281Tina380 20:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
I think cheating is wrong, unless you are unable to obtain the pokemon any other way. for example, I live in Canada, and there is some sort of law preventing them from hosting events here. I am getting an action replay, but only to get event-only pokemon that it is physically impossible to get any other way. I even shelled out 30 bucks on a pokemon colosseum bonus disk because its less cheating than an action replay to get a Jirachi. Like my cousin said, It takes all the fun, challenge and fairness out of the game if you use it to get everything. Retasulettuce 02:29, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Lists of codes?

I think there should be lists of gameshark codes on Bulbapedia... I know a lot of people are 'against' codes, but I think a Wiki should strive to include all the information about the pokemon games possible, especially considering that gameshark codes are so well-known in the history of pokemon games ^^

I'm not sure how to start making pages for codes though, and how they should be laid out on a page... can anyone help out? --Malorie 11:20, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree. But there are so many anti-cheater extremists that I think it would be impossible. Saying that you never cheated on a Pokémon game in your life is a down right lie. --ケンジ ガール 11:31, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, as long as we take a 'Neutral Point of View' approach, and post them for the purpose of complete information for a Pokemon wiki, I personally think it should be okay. ^^ There won't (or shouldn't) be any kind of extremist drama either way as long as there's a NPOV stance. :3 --Malorie 12:29, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

No, No. NO Gameshark codes! We are an informitive wiki, NOT an on-line strategy guide! --Theryguy512 13:54, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Firstly, what's not informative about listing codes? Secondly, how do you explain the 'game guides' category on Bulbapedia? --Malorie 19:27, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Codes completely ruin the point of playing the game!PokeManiac102 19:28, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
And that's a neutral stance on things how? It'd be like someone saying a page for Scientology shouldn't be on Wikipedia because they think it's 'morally wrong'. Regardless of peoples view on it, the information should still be posted from a neutral stance. Besides, lets not forget about people who use codes to play the game a second time with a different experience, ie. having a different starting pokemon, or people who use codes to explore the games programming and such. --Malorie 19:39, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
And all I'm getting is that you want the codes.PokeManiac102 19:40, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Also, someone did post them a few days ago. I erased them.PokeManiac102 19:41, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I want the codes to be listed on Bulbapedia, if that's what you mean. Isn't Bulbapedia designed to be a resource for all things Pokemon? Deleting pages of information, despite how factual and accurate it is, seems somewhat silly to me. If nothing else, I think at the very least, external links to such codes should exist. Blocking out an entire aspect of Pokemon because some users frown upon it (and, conversely, some people approve and encourage it), seems to defeat the point of having a wiki in the first place. --Malorie 20:40, 5 January 2008 (UTC)\
You're not getting it, are you.. cheating is frowned upon here. We are not Wikipedia. We don't have anything on cheating because we don't allow it, hence why pages on GameShark codes and the like are deleted, mainly because they are a bunch of of 'unencyclopedic' bullsh*t. If you want cheating codes, go somewhere else. Tina δ 20:43, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Bulbapedia =/= Wikipedia. Cheating is frowned upon here. Tina δ 19:42, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
im a cheater, but i only cheat with whats given to me. so, while i may not magically create an Arceus, i may magically create an Azure Flute.... MAGNEDETH 21:03, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
"Frowned upon here"... by whom? By the admins/editors? This page would be already deleted if that was the case. By community overall? As you can see, it's not true for everyone, and you can't say who is in majority.Bulvik 08:49, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Legitimate uses for cheats

I have not cheated, but thats cause I'm not smart enough to go find them. And I have no Gameshark. --133Darth196Cookie197Monster471 22:46, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, i have to say that i have a Arceus on my Diamond Game via Action Replay from a friend of mine. But that was only because i hated it that i couldn't get Event Pokémon. I'm seriously a fair player (i have completed a big part of the National Dex without cheating) Tomazzo

I see nothing wrong with using cheat devices to get Event Pokémon. Some people (like myself) simply can't get to those events at all, and once the event's over we have absolutely NO chance of getting that Pokémon; it's even worse when the event only takes place in ONE COUNTRY, meaning that other players have to either: Cheat, shell out ridiculous amounts of money and hope we can get there in time (if we're even lucky enough to hear about it at all...), or try to get over the fact that we'll never have it.
There's a few other situations where I don't mind cheating, but I know others would be against them: Filling the Pokédex (I don't like having my PC Boxes stuffed with Pokémon that I would never use, and it would just be too hard for me to keep them organized), getting certain stat-raising items (I'd rather cheat and get 999 PP Max than torture myself getting PP Ups), getting all TMs (you can only find one of a certain TM (Flash Cannon, for example), but you want a lot of your Pokémon to know the move). Then there's the one that everyone would be against: Changing movesets (Yes, I'm guilty of this one... but I've never been able to play a Wi-Fi match, so my use of illegal moves has been limited to Sinnoh's Battle Tower and Pokémon Battle Revolution). Diachronos 17:52, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Spotting Cheaters

Would it be worth adding a "How to spot some Hacked Pokemon" section. It wouldn't be able to tell you about all Pokemon but some such as the Eevees and ther evolutions and starts and a few others - it could help those online avoid cheats Phantom

I agree, in fact I only came to this page to ask how, as I often use the GTS but plan to enter the Pokémon Showdown thing, so I want to know, even if someone just posts it on my talk page that would be fine. Theininen 21:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

That would be really useful. Not that I can enter that Showdown, but, say, if I could and I didn't notice that that Tauros I got via the GTS came in a Cherish Ball... --Turaga Dlakii 12:33, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok - I'll get working on it

Spoting cheaters is somewhat easy, as their Pokémon are usually at Lv.100 and are shiny and they have Pokérus too. hfc2X 17:08, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Spotting *bad* cheaters is usually easy to do (how many Wondertombs are seriously going to look real?), but what's to differentiate my level 100 legal shiny Latias from the five minute rush-job some kid threw together that looks similar? The fact that a PKM file check of mine clears, while his would appear as a hack right away. This sort of distinction (or lack thereof) is a reason I believe there ought to be some sort of "legal vs. legit" section on cheating here, a la <a href="">this page</a>. At some point, there really is no way to tell if a pokémon was hacked, but common sense is your best tool, especially on GTS where you can't see a whole lot about your trade partner beforehand. Make sure the moveset, region of origin, level, place, and date met, caught ball, etc. are all fine, and then it's about as much as you can do without checking it on an external device. Of course there's legality checkers like Sabresite's Legal.exe which do exist out there, but that usually requires the use of a flashcard and pokesav program to extract the pkm file for inspection. Side note: what does Pokerus even do for you when you're making your pokémon anyways? EV training is obsolete for you by then, right? So... NonaSuomi 17:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I think it's up to players whether they cheat or not, also shouldn't this page mention quick leveling up with rare candies? Prof. Pine 21 October 2008:

If it's for mentioning that cheaters level up their Pokémon with Rare Candies, yes. But if it's for giving some codes... NEVER MIND!! hfc2X 23:01, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Including Cheats?

As others have pointed out, it WOULD be informative. Yet, at the same time, it isn't needed for the full experience from Pokemon

Maybe a link to some common ones so that people can avoid them, or maybe a sample code (let's say a... 5 Pokeballs Cheat. After all, who in their right mind would use that?) so that one can see how a code is built? Icalasari 23:15, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

  • I recommend describing well-known cheats, with links at the end of the article to GameFAQs cheating guides. That's sufficient to tell non-cheaters what sort of cheats are out there, while giving everyone else a way to find their own Gameshark codes. --JDigital 23:54, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

RNG Abuse as Cheating?

I find it difficult to believe that Bulbapedia has no mention of anything short of an external device as "cheating" here. At nationals just this year, I came across a guy with a team of six "legal" shinies with amazing stats that he got using an RNG abuse tactic as employed by the program "RNG Reporter" by Smogon's mingot (

If this merits an entirely different article, feel free to move both this discussion and my edit, but I firmly believe that this sort of tactic is just as broken as action replay or other devices, and so belongs here. Let's get some discussion on this; I talked to the guy who wrote that program himself, and Marriland apparently spot-checked these pokémon and they came out clean, but then so did a team full of from-scratch competitors from at least two of the competitors I know of, one of whom is going on to Worlds last I heard. NonaSuomi 17:27, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

By that logic using an IV calculator to find your IVs, using a guide to EV train and using Bulbapedia to find out what moves your Pokémon can learn is also cheating, pretty much. If you've never been in the fandom or read a guide and battle someone that has meticulously picked an amazing moveset with really good Pokémon, bred for IVs and ability and EV trained, you could also call that cheating when your opponent was actually just using resources to help him battle. Your opponent still had to EV train, level up etc. (and had to tap the friendship and coin toss apps a bunch too). Technically it could happen to anyone by randomly tapping their apps and doing the right steps, but he was just using a "guide". You could have too. Perhaps there could be a controversy section on the Platinum RNG page or something, but I really don't think that that qualifies as cheating.--RexRacer 17:41, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Well if that's your take on it then the Mew glitch in RBY, the GTS cloning glitch, or any other game exploit would be considered completely legitimate then? Would you not cry foul just as much when someone hit their coin toss a few hundred or more times rather than spend the time to get a real chain breeding process going? No matter how you look at it, you're taking shortcuts around how the game was meant to be played in order to gain an advantage over your opponent, which is the very definition of what cheating is, in videogame or out of them. Also spellcheck. Unrelated note: is anyone besides me seeing a lot of 503 errors here today? NonaSuomi 18:01, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, lots of 503 errors D: Anyway, this is just the opinion of one person. My definition of cheating is using an external device to modify the game data. I'll see if anyone wants to weigh in on this and put it to a vote tonight. --RexRacer 18:45, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Sounds good to me, and yeah- this sort of thing is pretty subjective most of the time, huh? NonaSuomi 19:09, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Include CPU "cheating"?

Would it be worth pointing out here some of the times that the CPU has seemed to be capable of 'cheating' in the Pokéverse? Notable examples include: The fight with the rival in RBYFRLG in Cerulean Town, where he is carrying a Lv16 Pidgeotto, despite the fact Pidgey does not evolve until Lv18; Lance's Dragonite with Barrier, a move it is incable of learning; Cynthia's Pokémon having 31IVs in every stat, despite (iirc) the PRNG making it impossible for a Pokémon to legitimately have such stats. And how about more blatent uses of CPU cheating? In Colosseum, for example, the Cipher Admins will use Thunder Wave to paralyse one of your Pokémon, and then continue to target the same Pokémon with Thunder Wave on all subsequent turns if you use a status-healing item, despite the fact that they should not be able to tell you have done such until after they've selected their attacks. If not here, then perhaps an article on the occasional Fake Difficulty in the Pokémon games? --Raylax 15:40, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, in Yellow, Pidgeotto can be found in Viridian Forest and the Cipher Admins thing can be countered with disable, so those things aren't really cheating. And besides, most of those things are in the trivia section of their respective article. Turtwig A Contributions Talk 16:01, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
...How does being able to Disable Thunder Wave change the fact that they're using Status Moves when they should see that target already has an infliction? As for the Pidgeotto in Yellow, the rival doesn't use Pidgeotto in Yellow, so that doesn't count. --Raylax 17:29, 21 August 2009 (UTC)


I'm not a regular editor here, but I thought it best to remove the following sentence: Some Pokémon fans, mainly those with any sort of affection towards their Pokémon, view cheating as unethical, although this argument is widely ridiculed by more reluctant fans. Aside from not making a lot of sense (what does 'reluctant' even mean in this context?), this shows some very obvious bias, suggesting that it's those with "any sort of affection towards their Pokémon" who view cheating as unethical. I realise this is a controversial topic, but there's no reason we can't approach it in a neutral, civil tone. Bikini MiltankAni241MS.pngMoo, I say. 13:47, 7 September 2009 (UTC)


Should we include a mention of this card, maybe as nothing more than trivia, or do we want to keep this article only about cheating in the games? ––Jared 07:04, 24 January 2010 (UTC)


Should probably mention somewhere that these two are popular to cheat with by giving them Wonder Guard. --Lustre 12:30, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

      Pretty sure it was mentioned on the wonder guard page, no need to post such minor details. Leafgreener in 2010 03:23, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Azure Flute

Well as of now it's NEVER been released at all. Period. Should someone add something to the article about this? Shiramu Kuromu 10:48, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Still not relevant to cheating. It may be released eventually. --SnorlaxMonster 10:59, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Glitches and Random Number Generator

I think we need some information on glitches here other than the word "Glitches". I added a link to the main glitch page. I'm not sure what else should go here... maybe we could list some common glitches used to "cheat" such as the Old Man glitch? But I'm not really sure where to draw the line.

Also someone mentioned this before but it never seemed to be resolved... how about some mention of messing with the random number generator to obtain Pokémon with perfect stats / Shiny Pokémon, etc.? That is definitely cheating... as in, someone who did so would definitely have an unfair advantage over someone who did not. Which is different from catching tons of Pokémon to find ones with good stats, because that is done in a way that the game was made to be played, where messing with the random number generator wasn't. As far as I know it's no different from using a cheating device to alter a Pokémon's stats except for the fact that it can be done with just the game and no third-party device. Dannyjenn 15:36, 21 March 2012 (UTC)]

Edit: Also, why is the neutrality disputed? This article is factual, not biased... the only reason a "Criticism" section is included is because it's important to the subject. Nothing in the article (besides the Criticism section) says anything one way or the other regarding cheating -- not that cheating is good or bad. Dannyjenn 15:42, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm assuming that the RNG isn't considered cheating because, technically, all you need to do RNG abuse is your game and the system you're playing it on. No Flash cards, no external devices to connect the game to a PC, no garish plastic add-ons that change the game's code as it's run (fox only final destination). It's not cheating because it's not breaking the rules. It's merely... "high performance" playing. The game generates the Pokémon entirely on it's own with no intervention. Whether this breaks the spirit of the game is a completely seperate argument.--Purimpopoie 16:07, 21 March 2012 (UTC)


Why not add action replay codes to the Appendix namespace? The entire purpose of the appendix namespace is to document stuff (such as walktroughs) that aren't mainspacable. The above comment is supported by Wildgoose. 01:31, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

I support this, but it is frowned upon by some, which apparently makes it the wrong thing to put on a neutral website. See above discussion about gameshark codes. I think there should be links, if nothing else, to the gameshark/action replay codes.Kj979 (talk) 21:15, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Wouldn't they be always be incomplete? There are an infinite amount of possibilities. --Abcboy (talk) 21:59, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, but if we added link(s) to the most popular websites, it (theoretically) wouldn't have that problem.Kj979 (talk) 14:33, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Key Items

I used Pokégen to obtain one in my Japanese rom of Pokemon B2 and it worked to change and change back the trio, but in the english rom, it doesn't seem to work. Maybe of this already happened before, with the illegal captured Mew and Deoxys, who wouldn't obey if weren't caught in their origin places. I believe the Item has some kind of mechanic that prevent it from work if the mirror is not obtained legally (I'm not sure as I didn't arrived in the city who you get one). Anyway, notable?--Igor (talk) 21:16, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Are the trio the same trio in both games? (In other words, are you trying on the same Pokémon that succeeded before?) --Abcboy (talk) 21:49, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Yes, the very same Kami Trio. I got them already in their new forms but the reveal glass didn't work, even after I got an English Landrous. I attemped to use the save of another person to show Landorus in that place where you get the glass, but nothing happened. I think it is the same case from Mew and Deoxys: if some kind of device is not activated after a succesful transference from Pokémon Dream Radar, then the Game becomes aware that you are cheating and completely blocks the Glass even if you attemp to obtain it "legally" in the Shrine. That's my theory. Now that I got my real game and traded all of the Pokémon I'm gonna really test now, but it may take a long time.
PS.: Sorry for my bad english.
PS. 2: I moved all of the Pokémon to my R4 rom of Pokémon Black 1 so I could obtain them all in the new game, and somehow the Kami trio reained those new forms there after the trade with the real game. Of course the forms didn't appear in the B1 and they looked like their old ones, but from the point of view in B2 they retained those new awesome forms! How cool is that? --Igor (talk) 22:21, 27 January 2013 (UTC)