battle network 1 has a game end skip glitch that was discovered after the TAS was made, would it be fair to just insert the game end skip and submit the old TAS with the glitch inserted at the end?
would the old player that made the TAS need to approve using his moviefile?
https://tasvideos.org/1560M
im talking about reddit skip
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zR8xpDOfeLs
it always bothered me how easy it would be to insert this at the end of the TAS
I'm not judge, but my thought would be that you can use the inputs as long as you add him as a co-author... The input file is open to everyone anyway.
Short answer:
Indeed. In this particular case, you can add that skip and submit the movie. You'll have to credit the original author.
Long answer:
Please always refer to our policy on authorship attribution. There is no hard rule as to when an author needs to be credited; every case is unique. In your particular case, it's pretty clear you need to credit the previous author because you use most of their work untouched. I have done that in the past myself (see: [4839] NES Ironsword: Wizards & Warriors II by eien86, Aglar & Randil in 07:09.06)
My personal note:
It is not about how many frames you've used, but how much of the intellectual effort from the previous author(s) you've recycled. For example, you might re-use thousands of frames which are nothing but wait time. There is nothing to do or change there anyway so there is no intellectual effort. However, if you re-use 15 key frames that you wouldn't otherwise have ever come up with yourself, then there's more of a case.
Then there is the issue of public domain knowledge. If the key frames you re-use are well-known by the game's community, then there is no claim of ownership by the original author.
Then there is the aspect of entertainment moves. These are very clearly required to be credited. If you use the artistic inputs of a previous author, then you need to attribute them. If you don't want them as a co-author you need to replace those moves with your own, or remove them (not recommended). That is, unless these moves are very intertwined with the gameplay. Then it becomes a bit of a gray area, if removing them requires inordinate amount of efforts.
At the end of the day, you can ask a judge. But don't let credit attribution deter you from doing any TASing.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11468
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
McBobX wrote:
So I have a question about mode choice for Spider-Man: Shattered Dimensions. Basically, the current TASes for this game both runs from power-on (which every run should be), meaning only Story Mode, however it is actually better to play on the Time Trial Mode (the speedrun mode for this game... The big reason for this is that it removes a quite boring part of the game which is about defending the tablet every time you want to warp... I believe we do have similar case of preferring speedrun mode for Braid.
My question is: Would a TAS of same categories for Spider-Man: Shattered Dimensions obsolete current ones if they're done on Time Trial mode?
RTA runners also use Time Trials as well, so it will be convenient for comparison. I'm willing to improve one of them and I want to make sure which decision to make.
Time Trial can only be accessed after clearing the game, thus we may use current Any% TAS for unlocking it (as verification movie).
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
battle network 1 has a game end skip glitch that was discovered after the TAS was made, would it be fair to just insert the game end skip and submit the old TAS with the glitch inserted at the end?
would the old player that made the TAS need to approve using his moviefile?
https://tasvideos.org/1560M
im talking about reddit skip
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zR8xpDOfeLs
it always bothered me how easy it would be to insert this at the end of the TAS
I'm not judge, but my thought would be that you can use the inputs as long as you add him as a co-author... The input file is open to everyone anyway.
Short answer:
Indeed. In this particular case, you can add that skip and submit the movie. You'll have to credit the original author.
Long answer:
Please always refer to our policy on authorship attribution. There is no hard rule as to when an author needs to be credited; every case is unique. In your particular case, it's pretty clear you need to credit the previous author because you use most of their work untouched. I have done that in the past myself (see: [4839] NES Ironsword: Wizards & Warriors II by eien86, Aglar & Randil in 07:09.06)
My personal note:
It is not about how many frames you've used, but how much of the intellectual effort from the previous author(s) you've recycled. For example, you might re-use thousands of frames which are nothing but wait time. There is nothing to do or change there anyway so there is no intellectual effort. However, if you re-use 15 key frames that you wouldn't otherwise have ever come up with yourself, then there's more of a case.
Then there is the issue of public domain knowledge. If the key frames you re-use are well-known by the game's community, then there is no claim of ownership by the original author.
Then there is the aspect of entertainment moves. These are very clearly required to be credited. If you use the artistic inputs of a previous author, then you need to attribute them. If you don't want them as a co-author you need to replace those moves with your own, or remove them (not recommended). That is, unless these moves are very intertwined with the gameplay. Then it becomes a bit of a gray area, if removing them requires inordinate amount of efforts.
At the end of the day, you can ask a judge. But don't let credit attribution deter you from doing any TASing.
Done, I got his permission and removed myself as author.
TAS i'm interested:
Megaman series, specially the RPGs! Where is the mmbn1 all chips TAS we deserve? Where is the Command Mission TAS?
i'm slowly moving away from TASing fighting games for speed, maybe it's time to start finding some entertainment value in TASing.
I'm going to ask this question here publicly since there's probably others out there who might have this same question.
I know that for a lot of older ROM hacks, primarily SNES ones, don't work right with most modern emulators with better emulation accuracy and/or real hardware. For SNES ROM hacks, I've found that some hacks that don't work with BizHawk's BSNES 115+ core but works with the other SNES cores (Faust and SNES9x). Would TASes of those older ROM hacks be acceptable even if they're using the less hardware accurate cores to get the hack working at all?
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11468
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
Darkman425 wrote:
I'm going to ask this question here publicly since there's probably others out there who might have this same question.
I know that for a lot of older ROM hacks, primarily SNES ones, don't work right with most modern emulators with better emulation accuracy and/or real hardware. For SNES ROM hacks, I've found that some hacks that don't work with BizHawk's BSNES 115+ core but works with the other SNES cores (Faust and SNES9x). Would TASes of those older ROM hacks be acceptable even if they're using the less hardware accurate cores to get the hack working at all?
All bizhawk cores that are "released" are acceptable for submission. If something isn't, we mention it on Wiki: EmulatorResources ("Not accepted at all" tab). All those faster cores are there for users who want more speed, and obviously in this case for those who want a game to even work.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Keep in mind by using less accurate cores, you are potentially more subject to encountering emulation inaccuracies, and thus have possibly encountering glitches only possible due to such inaccuracies. If a gameplay affecting glitch is used and ends up understood to be abusing an inaccuracy (in a way making it impossible to perform on console in principle), that can invalidate a run. Of course, in cases where you don't abuse glitches, this probably not an issue.
Also, using a less accurate core generally means less accurate timings, so potentially "gaining" time due to such. Such gains of course would get discounted for purposes of comparison / obsoletion, although if no previous TAS exists, this isn't an issue.
The latest Kirby's Dream Land submission runs the game in GBC mode.
It was found that doing so and using a specific color palette is faster due to less lag.
This method itself wasn't even fully explored as the runner stated he didn't want to play through the game 16 times, each time using a different palette.
As a side note, some palettes are not so nice-looking...
While it seems like a legit thing to do, will this be something that is of significance when deciding if one run obsoletes another?
Shouldn't plain GB games be played only in GB mode?
battle network 1 has a game end skip glitch that was discovered after the TAS was made, would it be fair to just insert the game end skip and submit the old TAS with the glitch inserted at the end?
would the old player that made the TAS need to approve using his moviefile?
https://tasvideos.org/1560M
im talking about reddit skip
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zR8xpDOfeLs
it always bothered me how easy it would be to insert this at the end of the TAS
I'm not judge, but my thought would be that you can use the inputs as long as you add him as a co-author... The input file is open to everyone anyway.
Short answer:
Indeed. In this particular case, you can add that skip and submit the movie. You'll have to credit the original author.
Long answer:
Please always refer to our policy on authorship attribution. There is no hard rule as to when an author needs to be credited; every case is unique. In your particular case, it's pretty clear you need to credit the previous author because you use most of their work untouched. I have done that in the past myself (see: [4839] NES Ironsword: Wizards & Warriors II by eien86, Aglar & Randil in 07:09.06)
My personal note:
It is not about how many frames you've used, but how much of the intellectual effort from the previous author(s) you've recycled. For example, you might re-use thousands of frames which are nothing but wait time. There is nothing to do or change there anyway so there is no intellectual effort. However, if you re-use 15 key frames that you wouldn't otherwise have ever come up with yourself, then there's more of a case.
Then there is the issue of public domain knowledge. If the key frames you re-use are well-known by the game's community, then there is no claim of ownership by the original author.
Then there is the aspect of entertainment moves. These are very clearly required to be credited. If you use the artistic inputs of a previous author, then you need to attribute them. If you don't want them as a co-author you need to replace those moves with your own, or remove them (not recommended). That is, unless these moves are very intertwined with the gameplay. Then it becomes a bit of a gray area, if removing them requires inordinate amount of efforts.
At the end of the day, you can ask a judge. But don't let credit attribution deter you from doing any TASing.
Done, I got his permission and removed myself as author.
Sorry for the late response. You don't need to remove yourself, just add the OG author as co-author of the new (your) movie.
Joined: 4/17/2010
Posts: 11468
Location: Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg
MUGG wrote:
While it seems like a legit thing to do, will this be something that is of significance when deciding if one run obsoletes another?
Emulation differences are actively discounted when comparing 2 movies and deciding obsoletion, because actual improvement must come from better optimization of gameplay.
MUGG wrote:
Shouldn't plain GB games be played only in GB mode?
This has never been a requirement, because most of the time it's just better look for no penalty. And if other modes have compatibility problems, they are not allowed for a given game.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Ambassador, Moderator, Site Developer, Player
(154)
Joined: 3/17/2018
Posts: 357
Location: Holland, MI
MUGG wrote:
The latest Kirby's Dream Land submission runs the game in GBC mode.
It was found that doing so and using a specific color palette is faster due to less lag.
This method itself wasn't even fully explored as the runner stated he didn't want to play through the game 16 times, each time using a different palette.
As a side note, some palettes are not so nice-looking...
While it seems like a legit thing to do, will this be something that is of significance when deciding if one run obsoletes another?
Shouldn't plain GB games be played only in GB mode?
This is a very good question and it has several nuances as applied to the Game Boy:
Typically speedrunners try to use the fastest iteration of original hardware available, or in the case of TAS rather to emulate the fastest iteration - an example is with XBox disc drive or hard drive variants affecting game load times. Because of how the Game Boy's backwards compatibility was designed, "original hardware" exists for GB games all the way through the GBC and GBA platforms, since the GBC cpu was designed to be back-compatible with GB games and the GBA includes an entire GBC cpu. There's an additional complexity of many games being designed for the -SGB- even though the SGB ends up in many ways a problematic platform. Playing some of the SGB enhanced GB games on GBC causes delays from palette swap behavior, but at the same time timesaves can be gained from the palette behavior as using a non-default palette can reduce lag and also create more possible RNG variance, which itself can lead to other timesaves. Some of this can be seen in the last few updates to the Red Save Glitch movie (known as Any%/Save Corruption in RTA) where timesaves were being discovered on the order of a handful of frames and clock cycles.
At the same time, Nintendo with the Game Boy Player accidentally created one of the most convenient verification setups of any console system, making it highly preferable to have TASes done in GBA mode for ease of verification.
The previous solution to these complexities has been to allow whatever the author prefers for their submitted movie, noting the high potential for verification if written for GBA mode but also noting that verification is not a requirement for submission. I'll also note that since many RTA communities standardize on the Game Boy Player for submission, TASing towards that platform also often aids in RTA comparison. I think the author choice continues to be a good solution as otherwise you just have a mess of options of different ways to standardize.
The palettes themselves would have no effect on gameplay once the game is started. What is actually happening is "startup state post-BIOS timing was slightly different because I inputed a different BIOS" (which even then, that's not even necessarily true as many palettes converge wrt timing, and there are other things you can do to affect timing here, like hold A/B/Start/Select, hold that palette input instead of tapping it, switch palettes multiple times, or outright delay the end of the BIOS by continously changing palettes at the end)
It's something where you could end up getting less lag way later in the run because you did some extra "meaningless" jump in the beginning of the game.
The palettes themselves would have no effect on gameplay once the game is started. What is actually happening is "startup state post-BIOS timing was slightly different because I inputed a different BIOS" (which even then, that's not even necessarily true as many palettes converge wrt timing, and there are other things you can do to affect timing here, like hold A/B/Start/Select, hold that palette input instead of tapping it, switch palettes multiple times, or outright delay the end of the BIOS by continously changing palettes at the end)
It's something where you could end up getting less lag way later in the run because you did some extra "meaningless" jump in the beginning of the game.
could it be that the inputs used to select a different color palette are what is making the difference, not the color palette itself?
The palettes themselves would have no effect on gameplay once the game is started. What is actually happening is "startup state post-BIOS timing was slightly different because I inputed a different BIOS" (which even then, that's not even necessarily true as many palettes converge wrt timing, and there are other things you can do to affect timing here, like hold A/B/Start/Select, hold that palette input instead of tapping it, switch palettes multiple times, or outright delay the end of the BIOS by continously changing palettes at the end)
It's something where you could end up getting less lag way later in the run because you did some extra "meaningless" jump in the beginning of the game.
could it be that the inputs used to select a different color palette are what is making the difference, not the color palette itself?
Well, it is the inputs, which causes the BIOS to do extra work, which has the apparent case of palettes changing (and of course, regardless of the palette PPU timing doesn't change, the code handling choosing the palette might have some variation due to how it selects the palette but that's more a case of some math taking different amount of times depending on inputs).
I have recently made a TAS and I am not 100% certain how I should go around submitting it if the run is even eligible.
Link to video
Basically, this game has an exploit where you can access the final boss from the level select after you have finished the first level which normally should not be possible. The complication this creates is that when you beat the final boss, the game does not consider itself completed. The game doesn't play the final cutscene or credits like it would in a full game run, the game does not save and as far as the game is concerned regarding progression, it still sees you on level 2. So you technically are not beating the game but rather, fighting the final boss early. However, the final boss is indeed how the game ends normally and when you legitimately beat the final boss from the level select after finishing the game, the game behaves the exact same way. No ending cutscene and the game doesn't update your save file.
The next thing I would like to ask is that if the run is eligible, what would be the most appropriate goal name? My best guess would be "warp glitch" but it doesn't really seem like a warp glitch. It isn't really a wrong warp but rather, it is exploiting a bug within the game's level select. The execution is as simple as "press down on the first frame of the level select screen". I just wanted to make sure I had all of the relevant info before trying to submit a run.
I have recently made a TAS and I am not 100% certain how I should go around submitting it if the run is even eligible.
Hi SuperSqank, I'll answer only based on the information you provide. We normally consider as end-of-game the cutscenes and credits that typically denote the game has been beaten. Given this jurisprudence, the fact you can beat the last level early doesn't not imply the end of the game, as you correctly identify. Therefore, it would not qualify into our 'Standard' movie category.
You may however submit this movie under a custom goal, e.g.: 'Earliest Final Boss Kill'. That would fall into the Alternative/Playground categories (which one is currently decided by entertainment potential, although this might change in the future).
Tl;dr: if you have something entertaining, submit it and we'll figure out where it fits
P.S.: Although we do not accept movies where parts of the game is skipped via level select. See: https://tasvideos.org/MovieRules, I do believe this is a special case that can be discussed independently, since the level is enabled via a glitch and not a password.
P.S.2: I just analyzed the video. It does seem you get to roll the credits, even if the final cutscene is not displayed. It can be argued that the have has been completed, although it may take some discussion.
I have recently made a TAS and I am not 100% certain how I should go around submitting it if the run is even eligible.
Hi SuperSqank, I'll answer only based on the information you provide. We normally consider as end-of-game the cutscenes and credits that typically denote the game has been beaten. Given this jurisprudence, the fact you can beat the last level early doesn't not imply the end of the game, as you correctly identify. Therefore, it would not qualify into our 'Standard' movie category.
You may however submit this movie under a custom goal, e.g.: 'Earliest Final Boss Kill'. That would fall into the Alternative/Playground categories (which one is currently decided by entertainment potential, although this might change in the future).
Tl;dr: if you have something entertaining, submit it and we'll figure out where it fits
P.S.: Although we do not accept movies where parts of the game is skipped via level select. See: https://tasvideos.org/MovieRules, I do believe this is a special case that can be discussed independently, since the level is enabled via a glitch and not a password.
P.S.2: I just analyzed the video. It does seem you get to roll the credits, even if the final cutscene is not displayed. It can be argued that the have has been completed, although it may take some discussion.
Regarding the end credits, you can access them in the options menu. They are always accessible from there and it was the most logical way to end the run. They typically play after the end cutscene but that doesn’t play when you play the final level through the level select, legitimately or with this glitch.
I will also mention that when you do this glitch, there are differences compared to selecting the final level through the level select normally. Mainly, you skip the first boss fight in the final level (I assume this happens because internally, Drakken is considered a separate level to the Shego boss fight, with you warping to whatever level ID the Drakken fight is rather than 4-5 (normally, you fight Shego and then the game automatically takes you to Drakken)) and you don’t have any of the upgrades you gain later on in the game. There is no way to fight Drakken only without the glitch, you always have to fight Shego first before Drakken through intentional means.
Basically, this game has an exploit where you can access the final boss from the level select after you have finished the first level which normally should not be possible.
Does the game normally need the player to use the level select screen to progress from stage 1 to stage 2? Or does it happen without the stage select screen?
If accessing the stage select is an extra/code thing that is not part of normal play, then this approach may be considered invalid for Standard class publication due to our current rules against using level select codes/menus to bypass gameplay.
However, if the level select screen is part of normally gameplay, then it seems like a validly exploitable glitch for reaching the credits.
EDIT:
SuperSqank wrote:
They typically play after the end cutscene but that doesn’t play when you play the final level through the level select, legitimately or with this glitch.
This makes it sound like the level select is not part of normal gameplay. So it’s likely not valid for Standard Class publication, but it may still be ok for Alternative/Playground.
Basically, this game has an exploit where you can access the final boss from the level select after you have finished the first level which normally should not be possible.
Does the game normally need the player to use the level select screen to progress from stage 1 to stage 2? Or does it happen without the stage select screen?
If accessing the stage select is an extra/code thing that is not part of normal play, then this approach may be considered invalid for Standard class publication due to our current rules against using level select codes/menus to bypass gameplay.
However, if the level select screen is part of normally gameplay, then it seems like a validly exploitable glitch for reaching the credits.
EDIT:
SuperSqank wrote:
They typically play after the end cutscene but that doesn’t play when you play the final level through the level select, legitimately or with this glitch.
This makes it sound like the level select is not part of normal gameplay. So it’s likely not valid for Standard Class publication, but it may still be ok for Alternative/Playground.
The level select isn’t needed for regular game progression (the game just automatically takes you to the next level) but it is a normal part of the game which doesn’t need cheats or anything like that. You unlock the level select after the first level and whenever you finish a level, it becomes accessible in the level select and you can revisit any level you have completed. Later on in the game when you unlock upgrades, you can revisit older levels and access new areas which is required to collect all collectibles for 100% completion. Pretty much every level behaves differently when accessed from the level select compared to through first play through game progression. The level select isn’t required to beat the game but it is an intentional and normal part of the game which is needed for 100% completion.
The only unintentional part is exploiting the way the level select is programmed to access the final boss early. The game is supposed to block you off from moving through the menu beyond the levels you have unlocked but on the first frame the menu is loaded, it doesn’t stop you from moving down like it’s supposed to. This lets you select an extra level and as luck would have it, that level is the final boss.
Hmm. We might have to discuss this one among staff.
EDIT:
After reading/discussing with staff, here’s my perspective (which seems to me mostly agreed among the staff that engaged).
While level select is part of normal play, and this glitch allows for accessing the final boss from the otherwise standard level select within normal play; the game seems to treat this boss battle as more of a level replay than it does completing the game, because there’s no internal indication that the game considers itself beaten upon beating the final boss with this glitch.
So since the game seems to basically be considering it as a level replay and not as actually game progression, we shouldn’t consider it as beating the game for Standard Class publication. It would, however, absolutely be fine as a goal for Alternative/Playground submission, and I’d encourage submission for that goal.
Hmm. We might have to discuss this one among staff.
EDIT:
After reading/discussing with staff, here’s my perspective (which seems to me mostly agreed among the staff that engaged).
While level select is part of normal play, and this glitch allows for accessing the final boss from the otherwise standard level select within normal play; the game seems to treat this boss battle as more of a level replay than it does completing the game, because there’s no internal indication that the game considers itself beaten upon beating the final boss with this glitch.
So since the game seems to basically be considering it as a level replay and not as actually game progression, we shouldn’t consider it as beating the game for Standard Class publication. It would, however, absolutely be fine as a goal for Alternative/Playground submission, and I’d encourage submission for that goal.
Alrighty. I already thought that it shouldn’t have been a regular Any% run at all but I wanted to make sure it would be ok as an alternative submission before attempting to submit. ty for clearing things up.
Joined: 10/18/2017
Posts: 169
Location: San Francisco
Hey there,
I was thinking of submitting a movie into TASVideos for the glitchless version of the Kirby Canva Course, but I haven't encoded the WIP yet. User movie #638603222047170630
I have to ask questions because in the SOS game WIP (User movie #638442731540730749), the RTA run made a new route that improved the best ending run by a minute. Also, selecting Redwin for the best ending is faster than Jeffrey. I was thinking of re-recording the existing movie. Should I use an existing movie for optimization that improves the game RTA in SOS?
Planned runs:
Marble Madness (Arcade, Genesis J, GG/SMS)
Proposed:
Ecco the Dolphin (Genesis, GG/SMS, CD: regular, camera freeze)
Ecco: The Tides of Time (Genesis, GG/SMS, CD; normal mode)
Mario Kart DS (all cups, all missions)
In progress: Grand Poo World 3 (all exits hard mode)
I want to ask a quick question about the SOS part. How different are the routes for the best endings for each character? If they're distinct in their own way in terms of routing and planning, it would make sense that each character's best ending route would be their own distinct branch. Also from I've been informed, there isn't any completed best ending TASes that exists to work with so you'd need to have someone make one if you need it for RTA purposes.
Joined: 10/18/2017
Posts: 169
Location: San Francisco
Darkman425 wrote:
I want to ask a quick question about the SOS part. How different are the routes for the best endings for each character? If they're distinct in their own way in terms of routing and planning, it would make sense that each character's best ending route would be their own distinct branch. Also from I've been informed, there isn't any completed best ending TASes that exists to work with so you'd need to have someone make one if you need it for RTA purposes.
Routes for best endings were different because the character starts off at a different location of the ship. Then, after the ship started to sink, the character must get the characters stuck in the ship until there were at least 25 points (the point system for each character depends) and a specific character. There were four branches that led to four different best endings, and in SOS there were four different endings. The boiler room part remains the same, but to save time, the player must leave the passengers near the start and the player touches the fire near the end, losing 5 minutes, and the characters respawn near the end. There are specific requirements for characters stuck in the skip depending on which player you choose.
Planned runs:
Marble Madness (Arcade, Genesis J, GG/SMS)
Proposed:
Ecco the Dolphin (Genesis, GG/SMS, CD: regular, camera freeze)
Ecco: The Tides of Time (Genesis, GG/SMS, CD; normal mode)
Mario Kart DS (all cups, all missions)
In progress: Grand Poo World 3 (all exits hard mode)
I have a question about uninitialized SRAM. Not sure where else to ask.
If there is a better place, please guide me to it.
When booting up Mario & Luigi Superstar Saga (GBA) for the first time, everything in SRAM is 0xFF.
When using the game's delete option and even the "factory reset" that wipes everything, the game will set everything to 0x00.
I'd like to ask if the 0xFF values are legit or is it just "uninitialized data" and the emulator sets it as 0xFF because it's the cleanest way to go about it?
Or does the original SRAM battery in GBA games like that also ship out with everything as 0xFF at first?
Is it safe to create a TAS that utilizes the 0xFF values or will it be considered invalid?
I have a question about uninitialized SRAM. Not sure where else to ask.
If there is a better place, please guide me to it.
When booting up Mario & Luigi Superstar Saga (GBA) for the first time, everything in SRAM is 0xFF.
When using the game's delete option and even the "factory reset" that wipes everything, the game will set everything to 0x00.
I'd like to ask if the 0xFF values are legit or is it just "uninitialized data" and the emulator sets it as 0xFF because it's the cleanest way to go about it?
Or does the original SRAM battery in GBA games like that also ship out with everything as 0xFF at first?
Is it safe to create a TAS that utilizes the 0xFF values or will it be considered invalid?
As i understand things, when a game doesn’t initialize RAM itself, the values of the uninitialized (or more technically, even the pre-initialized) RAM can be any value due to the electronics within the console itself. Sometimes values may persist between power cycles, other times they won’t.
Since the pre/uninitialized values of RAM could vary even between two theoretically “identical” systems, there’s no way to code an emulator to perfectly mimic a real system in this aspect. Thus emulator developers have to somehow seed the RAM with some sort of value(s) before the game code does any initialization itself. 0xFF is just what happens to be the value that the devs use to pre-seed the RAM for the emulator you’re using.
It should be fine for TASing. Where it could become an issue would be with console verification. But even then, there are ways to make it potentially work using custom software to pre-seed the RAM on the console.
