Shady Guy Jose

Meaning 9 different scenarios (Wii, GameCube, emulator, each in PAL, NTSC and PAL60), of which 3 (the emulator ones) have only an academic purpose, while 6 are actually related to actual possible legit gameplay. I can help in a few months, but this is gonna be a LOT of work ? EDIT: PAL60 isn't supported, but NTSC 480p is. However, that should not be any different from 480i regarding timings, so we're down to NTSC/PAL on GC and Wii

And let me throw another spanner into the gears while I'm at it: there may be differences between PAL and NTSC versions due to the 50/60Hz video modes, which affect timings. EDIT: I'm not sure whether the PAL version supports PAL60, but if it does, then it may be different from both PAL and NTSC.

Regarding the Wii: I was always under the impression (and said so earlier) that on actual backwards-compatible Wiis there was no emulation going on for GameCube games, just a CPU underclock. Is this not the case? If so, two playthroughs are in order. In two or three months, I might be able to do a Wii test, but I can't do it on a GameCube, so if someone has the setup and can do ir earlier, it would be much appreciated.

So the question is whether Box's inbuilt emulator will produce vBlank interruptions, which are more easily detected in stationary encounters. Does this justify a Ruby playthrough on a GameCube/Wii? Some edge case legality checks could benefit from it, no?

The possibility was raised (based on anecdotal reports) that Box's inbuilt RS emulator, in and of itself, even running on actual hardware, might produce mismatches due to programming oversights by GF/Nintendo. EDIT: saw your second message now

Sorry, I don't see what you're getting at. You mean that we could test it on a GC emulator, eliminating the need for actual hardware, or that testing isn't necessary at all?

The thing is, as I said earlier, the behavior tends to differ between emulators. There have been reports of mismatches on VBA, but from my (admittedly limited) testing on other emulators (namely mGBA on Windows and John GBA on Android), that doesn't happen. I can upload my stationary PKM files from a Leaf Green playthrough I did on both of them (syncing through Dropbox so I could play on the go and at home). Box may have a behavior that's similar to VBA, or a different one altogether, so testing may be warranted.

I would seriously laugh out loud if this produced some Pokemon with mismatched PID/IVs in the way VBA does (mGBA and John GBA apparently don't, from my latest Leaf Green playthrough). And I wouldn't know whether to laugh or cry if someone's precious shiny legendary got flagged as illegal in recent games because of this oversight by Nintendo, in case it does happen.

It's connected to controller slot 2

My point exactly: they don't have to. When you're using the emulator, it saves to a physical cart.

Oh, and regarding "legitimately transferrable to Gen 3 games": we're not really talking about a transfer here, unless you mean the special gifts you get from that game, but rather a Gen 3 save played in Box's built-in emulator, right? EDIT: which would be stored in and dumped from an original R/S cart, which would be in a GBA that's connected to the GameCube at all times during play

There shouldn't be any difference. A Wii running in GameCube mode is virtually the same as a GameCube (same CPU architecture, underclocked to match the GameCube speed when running GameCube games).

The Game Boy Player isn't involved whether it's a Wii or a GameCube, IIRC. The games connect through a GBA-GameCube cable, and they work the same in a GameCube and BC Wii.

There's no Wii version. He means playing the GameCube version in a backwards-compatible Wii, which should be exactly the same as playing it on a GameCube.

Well, for what it's worth, so far, John GBA has been consistently producing Method 1 IVs for stationary encounters. As I've said in the other relevant topic: I've been playing this save on two emulators (VBA-M on PC, John GBA on Android), through Dropbox syncing, so I can actually test for differences. Indeed, if you think it's relevant, I still have an unawakened Snorlax with which I can test it out. I can capture it multiple times on both emulators and provide the resulting .pkm files. If needed, I can also inject my save into the real cartridge and do the same on GBA/SP and NDS, although restoring it multiple times to catch a meaningful sample would be a lot more work, and I assume the real cartridge behaviour is documented by now.

What emulator are you playing in? I'm currently doing a Leaf Green playthrough, and I'd like to avoid this (@theSLAYER, sorry for hijacking *two* threads, but this is relevant information ?)

Thanks. If I don't get any flags in PKHex, I'm good enough to avoid having to double-check the IVs in RNG Reporter, right?

This just prompted me to do a quick check-up of my recent Leaf Green playthrough on John GBA (Android). Apparently, all of my stationary Pokémon are legal. Is this a known problem with specific emulators? I occasionally play the same save on my computer, with the latest version of VBA-M (Windows x64), as I have them synced through Dropbox. I intend to write the save into my cartridge in the end and transfer any valuable Pokémon up to the current games, so should I be careful not to catch any stationary Pokémon in VBA-M, or at least double-check them?

But do they have anything that could be flagged as illegal?

Hmm, back to playing the waiting game, then. Thanks, everyone

So basically they're encrypted in the same way, but with a different key than they would normally? Thanks for the explanation.

They have to be. They're encrypted differently (to the point of incompatibility). I assume that the save from a legit cart used on a Gateway EMUnand will be no different from the save generated by a ROM used on the actual flashcard, but both of these, while equal among themselves, are at least encrypted differently from a normal save.

First of all, let me clarify that I'm NOT complaining about the delay. I appreciate Kaphotics's and everyone else's work on it, as it's proven itself to be a very useful tool, and I know it can be a daunting task, but I'm just curious about why it has been more than a month and a half since it was announced to come "by the end of the month". Have there been any unexpected issues, manpower shortage, or just any more important stuff to attend to? Again, I'm not complaining, I'm just curious, and I fully understand if this can't be disclosed, but I would just like to know what to expect, since I've been religiously checking the website every day just to be greeted by the same bold message every time... EDIT: I know some forums look down upon discussing other websites. I'm only posting this here because Pokécheck has no dedicated forums and is more like an online-hosted program than another website, and this is the place that seemed more appropriate for its discussion. If any mod feels it's inappropriate, feel free to close or delete this thread. I just humbly ask you to not consider this an infraction, if it's the case, as I found no other place that seemed better for this question.

So there could be something to it? Even if it does not lead to making it easier to decrypt regular saves, I assume devs would find some used for decrypted saves, even if only from flashcard users...

Yes, I know about that, I wasn't suggesting dumping the keys. I take it to mean that even the old encryption is uncrackable, then?