|
|
Post by kirbychu on Aug 6, 2010 9:31:00 GMT -5
Now about shininess and gender, take into account that certain Pokémon were deliberately created having a specific gender in this fourth generation, as well as some created deliberately shiny. The best examples would be Whitney's girly Pokémon and the Red Gyarados in HeartGold and SoulSilver. Doesn't this tell us some degree of deliberation could be used then, when mapping gender and shininess to the last generation's structure? ...Not really. It just tells us that the programmers are able to pick those things when creating event-scripted Pokémon. When it comes to the randomly-generated Pokémon found in the wild, it's a completely different matter. Short of programming new code for each individual one of the billions of different possible IV combinations for each individual Pokémon, it just wouldn't be possible. |
|
|
|
Post by Johans Nidorino on Aug 7, 2010 10:19:57 GMT -5
Now about shininess and gender, take into account that certain Pokémon were deliberately created having a specific gender in this fourth generation, as well as some created deliberately shiny. The best examples would be Whitney's girly Pokémon and the Red Gyarados in HeartGold and SoulSilver. Doesn't this tell us some degree of deliberation could be used then, when mapping gender and shininess to the last generation's structure? ...Not really. It just tells us that the programmers are able to pick those things when creating event-scripted Pokémon. When it comes to the randomly-generated Pokémon found in the wild, it's a completely different matter. Short of programming new code for each individual one of the billions of different possible IV combinations for each individual Pokémon, it just wouldn't be possible. Truth is, those NPC Pokémon still obey the data structures of player's Pokémon. You left me studying this for a while  Preserving shininess/non-shininess and gender could be complex, although it would require a few arbitrary programming decisions in the process. But it's not impossible to map if what you seek is for the game to still show them as shiny/non-shiny, male/female. (But if you've found somewhere on the Internet where they've already proven it's impossible, I'm all for learning). For the IVs, what I'd do as a programmer is mutiply the values by 2 and copy the Special IV into Special Attack and Special Defense. That'd keep the same distribution in relation to the maximum values. Not exactly y = 2x, but y = (2(x + 1)) - 1 given the zero-based nature of it. |
|
|
|
Post by kirbychu on Aug 7, 2010 10:43:13 GMT -5
The NPC ones differ from the player's ones in that they have set values. Red Gyarados is shiny because the programmers hand-picked values to make it shiny. This isn't true of any other Pokémon the player can catch, which means there's way too much randomized code for them to accurately predict how to properly translate every single case into a working copy adding all the new substructures without glitching the Pokémon into a Bad Egg.
Okay, I'm not going to say it's impossible, but it'd take forever to figure out, even longer to code, be a complete nightmare for the testing department, and then most likely not even be used by 90% of the players anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrmolecule on Aug 7, 2010 16:28:17 GMT -5
While the transferring of Gen I/II Pokémon is as realistic as Nintendo releasing classics on the iPhone, I would like to see the Jamboree TCG expansion pack. The Pokémon TCG is going through the same aging process that others (like the Star Trek TNG CCG games my brother used to do) experience: increasingly complicated rules. Rather than Basic, Evolutionary, and a few others (such as Baby in 2001), there's tons of other things, often combining two energy types or two Pokémon in one card, like so. They need to re-release Jamboree and maybe one more card set that attracts the older set. All of the newer sets are fly-by-night "fad" sets, if you know what I mean. |
|
|
|
Post by Johans Nidorino on Aug 7, 2010 17:08:34 GMT -5
The NPC ones differ from the player's ones in that they have set values. Red Gyarados is shiny because the programmers hand-picked values to make it shiny. This isn't true of any other Pokémon the player can catch, which means there's way too much randomized code for them to accurately predict how to properly translate every single case into a working copy adding all the new substructures without glitching the Pokémon into a Bad Egg. Okay, I'm not going to say it's impossible, but it'd take forever to figure out, even longer to code, be a complete nightmare for the testing department, and then most likely not even be used by 90% of the players anyway. Do bad eggs come up from manipulation of personality values? And the converting procedure I found earlier isn't that difficult and it works if you prove it backwards... I'd post it but it's like one screen tall and don't want to annoy anybody. But in a nutshell, it doesn't need the handling of billions of possibilites in one run of the program like you first seemed to imply. The Pokémon TCG is going through the same aging process that others (like the Star Trek TNG CCG games my brother used to do) experience: increasingly complicated rules. Rather than Basic, Evolutionary, and a few others (such as Baby in 2001), there's tons of other things, often combining two energy types or two Pokémon in one card, like so. I love the art in that set of cards with the combined legendaries on it (check here the ones who haven't seen it) |
|
|
|
Post by Fryguy64 on Aug 7, 2010 18:02:00 GMT -5
Don't Pokemon come with the data of which game they were caught in and where? Wouldn't it be a case of programming in: If the Pokemon was caught in x game and it meets x game's shiny conditions then show as shiny?
I hope I haven't missed the point entirely...
Seeing as how the issue only arises with legacy Pokemon being transferred, that would be one way around it. Of course, it would mean you could have the same Pokemon with the exact same IVs in the new game that wouldn't be shiny, but hey.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johans Nidorino on Aug 7, 2010 19:12:29 GMT -5
After googling, I found they were discussing this stuff here, though I bet it has been discussed in a lot of other forums. If the Pokemon was caught in x game and it meets x game's shiny conditions then show as shiny? From that statement: - "if it was caught in x game and meets x game's shiny conditions" would be this.
- "then show as shiny" would be the method that programmers of the conversion program/hardware would have to come up with to leave the Pokémon like this
OK, I decided to post my conversion method here ^_^ |
|
|
|
Post by kirbychu on Aug 7, 2010 20:01:10 GMT -5
Don't Pokemon come with the data of which game they were caught in and where? I'm pretty sure that data was one of the new substructures added in Generation 3... At least I don't remember RBY or GSC keeping any record of where you caught anything. That forum raises another issue I hadn't thought about - the way that an Unown's letter is determined was changed in Gen 3. In fact, from what I can find, nobody has even been able to figure out exactly how it was determined in Gen 2, other than it being somehow worked out from a garbled combination of IVs. |
|
|
|
Post by Johans Nidorino on Aug 7, 2010 20:24:56 GMT -5
Don't Pokemon come with the data of which game they were caught in and where? I'm pretty sure that data was one of the new substructures added in Generation 3... At least I don't remember RBY or GSC keeping any record of where you caught anything. It does exist there, but it's hidden, and only used in Crystal. Remember the old woman to the north of Cianwood City that rates how good is your Pokémon? She also guesses where was it caught. But, that's not necessary for what Fry proposes, as the conversion program and hardware would be for converting Pokémon from the only past system (any game) to any of the later generations. Now for the Unown thing... We're theorizing what would happen if Game Freak made the conversion hardware/software. Being the creators, they should know the coding even if we players don't  |
|
|
|
Post by kirbychu on Aug 8, 2010 6:35:20 GMT -5
I still say it's more work than it's worth. |
|
Preserving shininess/non-shininess and gender could be complex, although it would require a few arbitrary programming decisions in the process. But it's not impossible to map if what you seek is for the game to still show them as shiny/non-shiny, male/female. (But if you've found somewhere on the Internet where they've already proven it's impossible, I'm all for learning).
