Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-31981697-20170722123329/@comment-32182236-20171023175428

"It is confirmed, that the annoying dog represents Toby, and since the room does fit that pretty well, it is logical to assume that the room is talking about Toby. And if this is true, then that means the room isn't canon, since if it were, we would obtain a logical paradox."

First off, we're discussing whether or not the first sentence is really true. I argue that it is NOT confirmed that the annoying dog represents Toby in Undertale. Second, the rest of it is you prioritizing vague similarities over concrete evidence. That's BAD-The direct evidence always comes first. We don't disregard the room, we disregard the vague similarity, passing it off as coincidence. The dogs all have the same color "white", and they're all quite "generic", and we have a near-exact match with Greater Dog without his armor-So possibilities for sprites are quite limited. All the Froggits have the exact same sprite. All the Temmies have the exact same sprite. (Even Bob) As a result, the similarity between the kickstarter Tobydog and Undertale's Annoying Dog sprites can only really tell us that they're both dogs. IF Tobydog even exists in Undertale, I suggest he doesn't. And while all the theories that attempt to explain the dog are unconfirmed, all the theories regarding Chara are unconfirmed. Should we disregard Chara? Technically, the theory that it was the same flower that Alphys injected with determination being Flowey isn't confirmed, and so are the theories on how exactly SAVE files work. We HAVE explanations for the room, and they work. They don't contradict any evidence within the game, nor do they contradict themselves-So they're serious possibilities to consider, and I got to them simply by interpreting the evidence in a way that doesn't create a paradox, nor actually change the evidence itself-The fact still stands that there's a computer that the dog used to program a game accidentally by barking into it. The information that the dog is Toby is NO fact. If it's not confirmed within the games, it's not a fact. While I prefer facts over fanon theories, I prefer fanon theories that explain everything in the game over theories that create logical paradoxes, or theories that completely disregard canon evidence.

The kickstarter line didn't say "sprites", it said "animation". The sprites themselves count as art, animating is turning all of those sprites into fluid motion, which requires using code like:

var z = 0; loop { z++; } animFrame[z%20].show;

Once again, I do not consider the line a lie-I consider it as proof the game in question is not Undertale. Guzusuru didn't help with the game the dog barked up accidentally-Those are two different games. Just because Guzusuru helped create Undertale, doesn't mean Toby has to credit him for helping with a NON-Undertale game, ie:The game in the developer's room. Like I said earlier, I rule Toby Fox not guilty.