[Other] Stop Binary Hacking; It's Holding Back the Entire Community

[HunarPG]

At least I am not begging to stay with binary

 

[HustlerJim]

At least I am not begging to stay with binary

No one is 😂
The whole point is let everyone do what they want so no one has to beg 😂

 

[evanonline]

(meme)

Seriously. Show people the results instead of telling them. Make amazing stuff. We are all here to make things!

Binary has more results on that end in gen 3. Binary's merits are plainly visible in the fact that more projects seem to get finished on binary. That's not enlightened centrism, it's just blatantly true. I KNOW decomps are better - instead of worrying about binary holding the scene back, push it forward with what you have yourself. Be the change you want to see! I wanna play everyone's hacks!

 

[Deokishisu]

Seriously. Show people the results instead of telling them. Make amazing stuff. We are all here to make things!

Binary has more results on that end in gen 3. Binary's merits are plainly visible in the fact that more projects seem to get finished on binary. That's not enlightened centrism, it's just blatantly true. I KNOW decomps are better - instead of worrying about binary holding the scene back, push it forward with what you have yourself. Be the change you want to see! I wanna play everyone's hacks!

Gen 3 binary hacking has been around since Ruby and Sapphire released over 20 years ago now. The Gen 3 decomps haven't been usable by most people until two-ish years ago, if that. Two years may actually be generous. Of course there are going to be more binary projects; that's a given with the time spans involved and the current inertia that binary hacking has in the scene (that I am trying to mitigate with posts like these). I myself have a decomp hack that is completed. There are several in the works right now. "Show me the money," in this case is a non sequitur. It doesn't take a lot to see why pointing at Pokemon Quartz from 2006 and being like, "Look at all these completed binary hacks! If decomps are so great, where are all the decomp hacks?" isn't really an argument for or against the decomps. It's disingenuous at best.

 

[HustlerJim]

Gen 3 binary hacking has been around since Ruby and Sapphire released over 20 years ago now. The Gen 3 decomps haven't been usable by most people until two-ish years ago, if that. Two years may actually be generous. Of course there are going to be more binary projects; that's a given with the time spans involved and the current inertia that binary hacking has in the scene (that I am trying to mitigate with posts like these). I myself have a decomp hack that is completed. There are several in the works right now. "Show me the money," in this case is a non sequitur. It doesn't take a lot to see why pointing at Pokemon Quartz from 2006 and being like, "Look at all these completed binary hacks! If decomps are so great, where are all the decomp hacks?" isn't really an argument for or against the decomps. It's disingenuous at best.

It's not a non sequitur nor disingenuous 😂
Amazing binary hacks have been completed in less than two years. And we're talking hacks that beginners actually get inspired by; hacks that are an entirely new mainline game on their own, not just FireRed improvement hacks. The fact is that once big decomp hacks like those hit the "shelves" beginners are gonna see them and want to make a hack the way that they did, the majority of newcomers will move to decomp, and you won't have to constantly make tantrum posts about it. But that hasn't happened because there's no visual example of decomp superiority, there's just the essays from people who work with it - which are off-putting to newcomers at best. The current inertia of binary hacking isn't going to be touched by posts like these and anyone with 5+ IQ should be able to see that. Make a hack that actually makes people forget about the days when binary hacks were cool and the inertia will actually stop. If you think decomp hasn't existed for long enough yet then just wait until it has? Silly posts like this just divert your attention from the actual future you seek while making no change whatsoever other than completely discrediting people doing amazing stuff in the binary scene.
Also "Several hacks in the works" would be good enough if you didn't constantly bring up the speed and quickness of decomp hacking in every argument you make for it. Show us the goddamn speed lol

EDIT: And the argument isn't "Look at all these completed binary hacks! If decomps are so great, where are all the decomp hacks?" as if decomp hacks are invisible, it's "Look at all these completed binary hacks! If decomps are so great, why aren't they as cool?". If a beginner is gonna look at Unbound and then any of todays decomp hacks, which do you think they're going to immediately want to emulate? The decomp allows you to do anything and yet Crown is the most innovative hack in the last 2 years. If you think that's disingenuous then you're too far removed from what a beginner sees or you're avoiding the problem, both of which mean binary gets to stay a little longer lol

 

[Anon822]

I think it's important to separate the process of decomp hacking from the projects created with it, because the quality of a project doesn't tell you anything about the quality of the method used to create it, or how the method compares to other methods.

Imagine for a moment that <insert your favorite hack here> was created purely with a hex editor and no other tools. You wouldn't go around advocating for people to give up all hacking tools in favor of a hex editor, just because an amazing hack was made with such a method. The qualities that make a hack good aren't dependent on what method the hack was developed with.

Are Unbound and Crown good because they were created with binary hacking, or are they good because they were created by talented people who put a lot of effort into creating them?

 

[HustlerJim]

I think it's important to separate the process of decomp hacking from the projects created with it, because the quality of a project doesn't tell you anything about the quality of the method used to create it, or how the method compares to other methods.

Imagine for a moment that <insert your favorite hack here> was created purely with a hex editor and no other tools. You wouldn't go around advocating for people to give up all hacking tools in favor of a hex editor, just because an amazing hack was made with such a method. The qualities that make a hack good aren't dependent on what method the hack was developed with.

Are Unbound and Crown good because they were created with binary hacking, or are they good because they were created by talented people who put a lot of effort into creating them?

Point missed again. No one would have to advocate for using "just a hex editor". Just like no one has to advocate the binary tools that made Unbound, or whatever made Crown. It's just the automatic assumption that beginners will reach - "I want to do what these people did!". And apparently OP is infuriated with beginners being pushed towards binary when decomp exists. There are zero topics going "screw decomp, just use binary and make Unbound!" It just happens naturally. Unbound and Crown are not good because they were created with binary hacking, but this is an assumption outsiders could reach and OP knows it, which is why he created this topic in the first place (his words), so let's not act like we need to separate process and product at this stage. If we separate them, this topic doesn't need to exist at all *shrug*
The facts are that binary is prevalent because binary hacks are cool because decomp hacks are not cool (yet). No one has to advocate anything here - this is what newcomers will experience. The good solution is to make better decomp hacks. The solution OP has chosen is to ask people to stop making binary hacks.

The qualities that make a hack good aren't dependent on what method the hack was developed with.

That is the antithesis of the original post good sir

 

[Anon822]

Point missed again. No one would have to advocate for using "just a hex editor". Just like no one has to advocate the binary tools that made Unbound, or whatever made Crown. It's just the automatic assumption that beginners will reach - "I want to do what these people did!". And apparently OP is infuriated with beginners being pushed towards binary when decomp exists. There are zero topics going "screw decomp, just use binary and make Unbound!" It just happens naturally. Unbound and Crown are not good because they were created with binary hacking, but this is an assumption outsiders could reach and OP knows it, which is why he created this topic in the first place (his words), so let's not act like we need to separate process and product at this stage. If we separate them, this topic doesn't need to exist at all *shrug*
The facts are that binary is prevalent because binary hacks are cool because decomp hacks are not cool (yet). No one has to advocate anything here - this is what newcomers will experience. The good solution is to make better decomp hacks. The solution OP has chosen is to ask people to stop making binary hacks.

My point is that people in this thread are using "look at all of these cool binary hacks" and "look at the lack of cool decomp hacks" as arguments for why binary hacking is just as good as decomp hacking(or better), when they should actually be comparing the merits of the methods themselves.

That is the antithesis of the original post good sir

No it isn't. Nowhere does the original post claim that every decomp hack will automatically be better than every binary hack purely because it's a decomp hack.
The original post states that decomp hacking would offer a better development experience, but says nothing about the resulting hack.

 

[HustlerJim]

My point is that people in this thread are using "look at all of these cool binary hacks" and "look at the lack of cool decomp hacks" as arguments for why binary hacking is just as good(or better) as decomp hacking, when they should actually be comparing the merits of the methods themselves.

Again, if you read carefully, those statements are never used as arguments for why binary is "just as good". They are used as explanations as to why the "inertia of binary" is not stopping. This seems impossible for your side of the argument to understand, but most people here know that when comparing the merits of the methods decomp wins nearly 100% of the time. That's why if this topic was simply "stop advocating binary hacking" there would be no argument. But the original post is drowning itself in "stop binary hacking so that people can see how good decomps are". If that's seriously needed just to get beginners to use the decomp then the problem isn't with the advocating of binary, it's with the advocating of decomp. Binary hacks being cool is all any beginner is going to see, like it or not, and in their minds alone it will be reason enough to think binary is "just as good". That is clearly what the original post is so upset about anyway. The reason that the merits of decomp are being hidden is because binary hacks and tools are impressive, OP is right about that. The failure is thinking that telling everyone to stop binary hacking is a better solution than making something cooler yourself, which you're more than capable of doing with the decomps

 

[evanonline]

Gen 3 binary hacking has been around since Ruby and Sapphire released over 20 years ago now. The Gen 3 decomps haven't been usable by most people until two-ish years ago, if that. Two years may actually be generous. Of course there are going to be more binary projects; that's a given with the time spans involved and the current inertia that binary hacking has in the scene (that I am trying to mitigate with posts like these). I myself have a decomp hack that is completed. There are several in the works right now. "Show me the money," in this case is a non sequitur. It doesn't take a lot to see why pointing at Pokemon Quartz from 2006 and being like, "Look at all these completed binary hacks! If decomps are so great, where are all the decomp hacks?" isn't really an argument for or against the decomps. It's disingenuous at best.

My point is less "where are all the decomp hacks" and more "actually making and finishing the decomp hacks will be what really pushes the scene forward". I realize I sort of mixed my points in my post - I think the amount of binary hacks does speak to the relative accessability of binary, but I didn't intend to imply decomps should already have that level of completion. That was bad writing on my part and I apologize, it IS disingenuous regardless of my intent.

I am absolutely not fighting against decomps. My point is only that making and finishing decomp hacks will prove their merit much more productively - and less controversially! - than arguing. Or better yet, elevate the decomp hacks that already exist! ROWE and Emerald Rogue are awesome, and the latter makes a VERY strong case for decomps by offering an extremely innovative spin on Pokemon's format without changing the underlying mechanics. And that's just the ones I know about! I'm sure there's more.

I don't expect there to be tons and tons of decomps already after 20 years of binary, but I'm saying "show me the money" because there IS money to show. It's better to talk about that instead of alienating people for their own projects. Focus on the good instead of decrying the perceived bad. That's all I meant.

 

[U.Flame]

U. Flame's post being a good example of this. If a kid can only figure out how to use Advance Text and AMap, they would still have an easier time with the decomps. Porymap is more user-friendly that AMap and the kid could search for the text they're looking to change and edit it without regard for offsets or repointing with no need to understand scripting. Even so, the terrible scripting system has a replacement in Poryscript that is easier to learn and has robust documentation to get the hypothetical kid started if they wanted to actually script. You don't necessarily need to understand or even be aware of what's going on under the hood to follow step-by-step setup instructions and run make after you've made your edits. Not to mention, starting the kids on the decomps gives them the opportunity to learn real skills if they decide to try out some C. If the decomps were around ~18 years ago when I was first starting as a clueless kid, I would've been programming for this entire time. I can't even imagine how important that would have been for my life and its trajectory. Don't rob kids of this opportunity by leading them astray.

If you can get Porymap to a kid, yeah I'd imagine they'd have a similar experience with Advance Map. But the bar to entry I referred to isn't the tools available to decomp, it's being able to set it up in the first place. I'm glad there's an effort to make setting it up more user-friendly, because that's one of the biggest obstacles that turn newcomers away. Going back to the example of kid-me, I was fairly decent at following tutorials as long as they described every step exactly and could be followed even if you didn't know what the steps were actually for. For example, "set a pointer to this offset" would be too vague, but "go to offset 0xXXXXXX and type 0x08XXXX" would be doable. Which I don't mean as a statement on binary or hex editing, just an example of the level of explanation tutorials would ideally be for people who have no idea what they're doing. The more accessible decomp is for newcomers, the more they'll be willing to try it, be it tutorials, additional GUI, or streamlining processes. I'm sure people would naturally gravitate more to decomp the closer it gets to the level of ease binary is. As it is, the appeal of "download Advance Map, double click the .exe, open the ROM, go wild" remains one of the biggest draws to binary for the inexperienced.

 

[Tyty210]

Hey, I'm someone who primarily comes from SMW hacking, and honestly seeing this debate is a little interesting to me. It's one that's popped up in our community before so I figure I'd chime in a little. We still do primarily binary editing through a few tools, but honestly that's partially due to the fact that SNES asm editing is much more approachable at a binary level due to tools like ASAR, and partially due to the fact our tools are actually quite polished and tend to -not- cause random corruptions. While I've seen people argue bar of entry for newbies as the big issue (and yes, you are -never- going to get as many adopters getting their feet wet with hacking when they have to set up an entire dev environment as opposed to running one exe on one file) I'd bring up that you're fighting against years of experience and resources as well. When you work on a large project for as long as some of these take, you establish a workflow, and adapting to a new workflow can be very difficult. When someone who has finished hacks in the past decides to start a new project, they're likely going to go with what's familiar over something intensely different unless the point of the new project is to play around with these new tools. If someone is used to making direct hex edits and working with the tools that are still considered up to date for binary hacking, that's probably what they're going to go with. Swapping out the tools that are broken for similar ones that don't disrupt said workflow.

And past that, you're not just fighting initial user experience, established user experience, but sheer resources as well. Yes, writing C code might be easier than staring at a hex editor, but following a quick guide to flip a few bits on a 10 year old forum post to make a small change is much more straightforward than hoping that some people in a discord might be able to point you at what file the function you need to modify is in. Furthermore, not everyone is a programmer, and not everyone wants to be. I can not stress this enough as someone from another community, the sheer idea that you are going to have to write your own code for certain features is daunting as hell when, well, a .ips or bps or ups or whatever format your community uses is -right there-. Having to merge in different codebases through git for community resource patches is, frankly to me, still actually kinda ridiculous (I think I'd rather do what I've seen with FE hacking and have a binary tool setup with a makefile and keep my patches separate). I understand pokemon hacking is very different, a lot more volatile, and all y'all can be a lot more hostile to eachother, but you're always dealing with people who regardless of their skill or time or whatever just want to make a game. Until using a decompilation is just as accessible as using a binary you aren't going to be able to get the majority of your community to switch over, and telling people they are actively dragging everyone around them down by doing so isn't helping.

Over in SMW we've argued for a long time about moving to a disassembly, and I've been told by some of the experienced ASM hackers over there that frankly at this point, for 99% of the people making hacks it's just not worth it. We're ultimately shackled to Lunar Magic, and despite it having some really real weird downsides and its own drama (it is utterly ridiculous that an export overworld function is a hard no) it is an incredibly polished tool, so there's an incredibly slim chance of replacing it. It is still to this day the most straightforward and easy to use level editor for hacking I have ever used, and it even beats Mario Maker 2 for me (though I think I like MM1 more). If you need to touch the code, it's much easier to use the disassembly as reference and write an ASM patch to insert with ASAR since you're going to have to work around Lunar Magic's ASM modifications anyways. Our entire tool ecosystem is built around this, and even then getting people to even switch tools that work in this ecosystem can be like pulling teeth. There are people who would rather stick with zsnes than switch to a new version of addmusic that doesn't cause more accurate emulators to explode. If you want that keep everything separate and have a dev environment build experience that a decomp provides, you can set that up too (users in the community have) since all the tools work straight from command line. Unless somebody comes up with a stronger tool that works cleanly with a disassembly, or there's a viable reason for us to move to a C decomp over a 65816 disassembly or binary editing it's a very very very hard sell, and I'd argue that GBA pokemon is basically at that crossroads even if there's competing tools and standards. It shouldn't be anywhere as hard a sell if the tools for the decomp are easy to use as I see argued, but being super aggro and elitist about it is going to make it a harder one. You'd be better off trying to make the experience of using decomp as close to "download files, run LunatoneMagic.exe, point at decomp folder" as you possibly can.

Sorry if this got a bit rambly and lost focus a bit, it's a late night post from a long day and my adhd is going all over the place from it.

 

[Hiroshi Sotomura]

A nuanced take, and much appreciation for you pitching in! (And a proper welcome for ya, too! I've always been intrigued by a lot of SMW hacks!)

 

[ResistantAnorith]

This actually sounds interesting. I'm at the start of an Emerald binary hack, but I might drop that and get into decomp instead. What held me back is my non-existent knowledge of coding, that made me think I just couldn't try my hand at decomp, as it would just be impossible. But you just took that fear away!

 

[Team Aqua Leader Archie]

Hey, I'm someone who primarily comes from SMW hacking, and honestly seeing this debate is a little interesting to me. It's one that's popped up in our community before so I figure I'd chime in a little. We still do primarily binary editing through a few tools, but honestly that's partially due to the fact that SNES asm editing is much more approachable at a binary level due to tools like ASAR, and partially due to the fact our tools are actually quite polished and tend to -not- cause random corruptions. While I've seen people argue bar of entry for newbies as the big issue (and yes, you are -never- going to get as many adopters getting their feet wet with hacking when they have to set up an entire dev environment as opposed to running one exe on one file) I'd bring up that you're fighting against years of experience and resources as well. When you work on a large project for as long as some of these take, you establish a workflow, and adapting to a new workflow can be very difficult. When someone who has finished hacks in the past decides to start a new project, they're likely going to go with what's familiar over something intensely different unless the point of the new project is to play around with these new tools. If someone is used to making direct hex edits and working with the tools that are still considered up to date for binary hacking, that's probably what they're going to go with. Swapping out the tools that are broken for similar ones that don't disrupt said workflow.

And past that, you're not just fighting initial user experience, established user experience, but sheer resources as well. Yes, writing C code might be easier than staring at a hex editor, but following a quick guide to flip a few bits on a 10 year old forum post to make a small change is much more straightforward than hoping that some people in a discord might be able to point you at what file the function you need to modify is in. Furthermore, not everyone is a programmer, and not everyone wants to be. I can not stress this enough as someone from another community, the sheer idea that you are going to have to write your own code for certain features is daunting as hell when, well, a .ips or bps or ups or whatever format your community uses is -right there-. Having to merge in different codebases through git for community resource patches is, frankly to me, still actually kinda ridiculous (I think I'd rather do what I've seen with FE hacking and have a binary tool setup with a makefile and keep my patches separate). I understand pokemon hacking is very different, a lot more volatile, and all y'all can be a lot more hostile to eachother, but you're always dealing with people who regardless of their skill or time or whatever just want to make a game. Until using a decompilation is just as accessible as using a binary you aren't going to be able to get the majority of your community to switch over, and telling people they are actively dragging everyone around them down by doing so isn't helping.

Over in SMW we've argued for a long time about moving to a disassembly, and I've been told by some of the experienced ASM hackers over there that frankly at this point, for 99% of the people making hacks it's just not worth it. We're ultimately shackled to Lunar Magic, and despite it having some really real weird downsides and its own drama (it is utterly ridiculous that an export overworld function is a hard no) it is an incredibly polished tool, so there's an incredibly slim chance of replacing it. It is still to this day the most straightforward and easy to use level editor for hacking I have ever used, and it even beats Mario Maker 2 for me (though I think I like MM1 more). If you need to touch the code, it's much easier to use the disassembly as reference and write an ASM patch to insert with ASAR since you're going to have to work around Lunar Magic's ASM modifications anyways. Our entire tool ecosystem is built around this, and even then getting people to even switch tools that work in this ecosystem can be like pulling teeth. There are people who would rather stick with zsnes than switch to a new version of addmusic that doesn't cause more accurate emulators to explode. If you want that keep everything separate and have a dev environment build experience that a decomp provides, you can set that up too (users in the community have) since all the tools work straight from command line. Unless somebody comes up with a stronger tool that works cleanly with a disassembly, or there's a viable reason for us to move to a C decomp over a 65816 disassembly or binary editing it's a very very very hard sell, and I'd argue that GBA pokemon is basically at that crossroads even if there's competing tools and standards. It shouldn't be anywhere as hard a sell if the tools for the decomp are easy to use as I see argued, but being super aggro and elitist about it is going to make it a harder one. You'd be better off trying to make the experience of using decomp as close to "download files, run LunatoneMagic.exe, point at decomp folder" as you possibly can.

Sorry if this got a bit rambly and lost focus a bit, it's a late night post from a long day and my adhd is going all over the place from it.

Decomp Lunar Magic When

 

[U.Flame]

You'd be better off trying to make the experience of using decomp as close to "download files, run LunatoneMagic.exe, point at decomp folder" as you possibly can.

Nice, that's pretty much exactly the point I was making, but you had much more experience and more detail making it.

I'm sure people would naturally gravitate more to decomp the closer it gets to the level of ease binary is. As it is, the appeal of "download Advance Map, double click the .exe, open the ROM, go wild" remains one of the biggest draws to binary for the inexperienced.

At the end of the day, beginners will most gravitate toward the program that works with the least amount of setup, which for Pokemon is Advance Map. While experts will most gravitate toward stability, which for Pokemon is decomp. And pretty much everyone wants ease of use. Hopefully, Hex Maniac Advance is shaping up to be the ideal those categories, as it's relative stability and ease of use is making many finicky old binary programs obsolete.

It's not to say decomp isn't ideal, but any decomp users' hostility towards binary just feels so needlessly petty if users can get the same things done with whichever method they prefer to use. Like many have said before, the positive reinforcement of making things easier to get into will yield much more positive experiences than the negative reinforcement of telling people they're holding others back. Doing that, no matter your intent, will cause people to push back and call you elitist.

 

[Dr. Seuss]

I was just wandering around the forum when I saw this.

I have always encouraged new romhackers to start giving a try to decomps because there is no real reason to go over binary hacking. For me it's a big nope to move to binary, and it's not because I don't like it. It's because I've restarted my game twice during the last 9 years and I won't go through all that process again.

And another reason why I'll stick to binary romhacking it's because I'm so used to all tools, commands, environment, etc from binary hacking that moving to something completely different like decomps will make me feel overwhelmed. I know these tools are outdated, buggy and barely reliable, but I grew up getting used to use them, to the point that I perfectly know how to handle them, how they work and how to use them without breaking anything from my game.

Again, for new romhackers, please go for decomps, but for me it's a big nope, and dot get me wrong that it isn't because I think decomps are bad. It's just that I like the old fashioned method.

(Now after making this very long post I can go back to my retirement house and will come back to post again in 5 years :P )

 

[Meister_anon~Master_o f_None]

I'm sure many will call me an elitist for spelling it out this plainly. I am not an, "elite," I just have more experience than 99% of you.

also note you go out of your way to not call yourself elitest while in the same breadth calling yourself the top 1%

Why Should We Abandon Binary Hacking?

Ok I'm gonna have to call bs on this.
you can't make that decision for someone else.


and there's PLENTY of great things you can do with binary thanks to all the amazing work people have put in on tools,
programs, and other resources.

Even just within the past 2 years there's been huge strides on the binary front, making many things
people thought impossible possible, and simple to boot.

Decomp is NOT a necessity.
its a choice.

For the scope of what most people want in a game, decomp is completely unnecessary and for many innaccessible.

Also because of its very nature of being a fully complete recreation of the games in a more accessible environment,
there is NOTHING to discover.

its literally impossible to "hold the community back" by not using decomp,
because there is nothing to innovate. unlike with binary where there are still problems to solve.

Your only limit for decomp is how well you can code.
I honestly don't know what great innovation you're expecting.

maybe this is some great troll or whatever.

but if you think decomp is so great and that binary users are stooges, the fan game community think the same about decomp users -_-

we have to code, edit and physically add resources, while they have a suite program with all the resources
that lets them create an game easily, untethered to the source material, or the limitations of gba like we are.

and make no mistake that will ALWAYS be the case.
there's a lot we can do with decomps but we are always going to be restricted by these limitations
of the format, regardless of the gen.

So technically speaking fan games will always have the advantage.

welp I guess someone has to write the

Stop Decomp Hacking; It's Holding Back the Entire Community

twitlonger now 😬

This entire argument is pointless.

 

[Team Aqua Leader Archie]

Even just within the past 2 years there's been huge strides on the binary front, making many things
people thought impossible possible, and simple to boot.

Decomp is NOT a necessity.
its a choice.

The levels of irony here are too intense 💀💀

 

[topalov]

The levels of irony here are too intense 💀💀

The irony here is off the charts 😂☠