# Glitch City Laboratories Archives

Glitch City Laboratories closed on 1 September 2020 (announcement). This is an archived copy of a thread from Glitch City Laboratories Forums.

You can join Glitch City Research Institute to ask questions or discuss current developments.

You may also download the archive of this forum in .tar.gz, .sql.gz, or .sqlite.gz formats.

## Forum Discussion

### Making GCLF less intimidating to newcomers - Page 1

Previous Page

- 1
- 2

Next Page

#### Making GCLF less intimidating to newcomers

Posted by: bwill11
Date: 2019-08-14 14:42:04
This idea for a topic originates from this discussion at Talk:GlitchDex/RB:220, so I'll copy and paste what was said there. The first two comments are mainly there for context that's not necessary, just to explain how this topic arose from a GlitchDex talk page.
————————————————————————————————————————————————-
I've tested this Pokémon's Pokédex data numerous times, and for some reason, I cant find consistency in location… I can't tell what is changing it. Wether it'd be party Pokémon, items, or even just the location and screen data. James-the-Charizard (talk) 11:30, 8 August 2019 (-06)
According to the research, this glitch Pokémon takes its dex entry from AA00. AA00 is in the SRAM/save data region, but it's not actually clear from that which bank (as it seems a different SRAM bank means AA00 could represent another memory address depending on what bank the game was on last if forced for the dex entry?) (for illustration I recommend reading https://github.com/pret/pokered/blob/master/sram.asm ). Viewing glitch Pokémon sprites will also partially corrupt the save data (but not destroying it, e.g. MissingNo. saves corrupts Hall of Fame if you have one so maybe a glitch Pokémon could corrupt AA00 on the relevant bank?) Adding to the complication, SRAM is not always available and may be locked. That could explain the many 9999s (mirroring a locked SRAM pointer and returning (0xFF bytes). I'll look into this tomorrow if you like. :) Torchickens (talk) 14:43, 8 August 2019 (-06)
If you could, please do. Unfortunately I may not be able to contribute a lot to the wiki side of this and Im just a bit too shy to reply into forums… >~<' (Even Though I like making friends and/or socializing, I just feel too awkward because I feel like Id be barging in.) James-the-Charizard (talk) 16:13, 9 August 2019 (-06)
This is me barging in with absolutely nothing to add for the sake of the example. I'm wondering if the huge amount of activity from staff, Metarkrai, RETIRE, et al. as compared to new members has given off too imposing of an impression. You're welcome to speak up about whatever you want, as you have on this page. Sherkel (talk) 23:52, 13 August 2019 (-06)
I would definitely agree that the large presence of admins, staff and distinguished members does make the forums look a lot more intimidating. I was pretty intimidated at first too (actually I didn't do anything at GCLF at first, I didn't have anything to contribute and I essentially had a phantom account for about a year until watching old Shenanigans speedruns and MissingnoXpert randomly showing up in my recommended reignited my interest in glitches). With me, Parzival, metalmario32, Matt1990, Yuzihax and Bert being the only very active regular members (Matt, Yuzihax and Bert are Member+ but the phrase "Member+" doesn't invoke the same level of importance as Administrator or Distinguished Member), the forums are a bit intimidating. The fact that the general complexity of Pokemon glitches is already a bit daunting doesn't help, but I do think having less staff, not because they're doing a bad job but because there's a lot of them for a site like GCLF that's relatively small, would definitely help GCLF seem a lot more open. Bwill11 (talk)
Shoot, I'm glad I said something now. I really appreciate the input and I'll take this up with the rest of them to see what they think. Ironically, when the forum was closer to 500 members, there were at least 15 admins at some point, with Member+ and Local Moderator positions being given out much more freely. Staff and other members should all be seen as equal here, and it might be possible that having such a large overlap made that sense of separation smaller. On the other hand, there used to be a lot more regulars…but on the other other hand, maybe I'm underestimating how many we have now…thanks for saying something, anyhow. (Shenanagans is basically the reason I'm still here too, by the way.) Sherkel (talk) 10:02, 14 August 2019 (-06)
I think we should make a topic specifically for brainstorming ways to make GCLF less daunting for new people, since I think others probably have good ideas too and this is a bizarre page to discuss this on. Bwill11 (talk)
————————————————————————————————————————————————-
I don't think James-the-Charizard is alone in being nervous about posting here. I've noticed that there is almost always at least 10 times more guests at GCLF than members, and usually the ratio is a lot larger. This definitely makes sense on the wiki, since many people probably just go there once for a specific answer or set of instructions and not return, but it doesn't make sense to me on the forums. My theory is that a lot of these guests are the same ones, and have an interest in glitches, but don't make an account because they don't want to say anything for the same reasons that James said. If anybody has a counterpoint or wants to run diagnostics to confirm or deny this, that would probably be helpful. Also any reoccurring guests that come here frequently but don't make an account for whatever reason, feedback would also be helpful.
Edit: As an idea, I think the member group topic is large, in an inconspicuous place (in the forum discussion, instead of on the front page like it should be, since it outlines how the website works), and filled with outdated information and is filled a bunch of things that don't exist anymore, like the Decamark research groups, and I have never seen the Crash and Burn tag so I assume it doesn't exist anymore. A similar thing with the 50 post boards, the member group topic says that there are some boards that open up upon reaching 50 posts, and I'm currently at around 70 posts and have not seen anything new open up, so I assume the boards that used to have a 50 post board requirement either a) no longer have the requirement or b) don't exist anymore. I also think Oldbie and Veteran Contributor groups are weird because all they signify is that (person) has been here a long time and if it is Veteran Contributor, they have also contributed a lot in that time. I don't think these people should be undervalued though, since they helped make the site what it is today, so I think that Oldbie and Veteran Contributor should be subgroups, so that their tag looks something like this
(whatever their group is, at least member+ so they still have the abilities they always had) - Oldbie/Veteran contributor
this way, it signifies that they are an Oldbie or a Veteran Contributor but it also simplifies the member groups, which will simplify the website for newcomers. These groups aren't all that confusing, but definitely make the list of different member groups longer than it really needs to be.

#### Re: Making GCLF less intimidating to newcomers

Posted by: Sherkel
Date: 2019-08-15 22:56:07
I did make that topic in that other area, actually, but nothing wrong with allowing said newcomers to pitch in, either! In fact, it'd be good to hear from them if you're right about how this place is seen. I can relate to it when it comes to other communities.
First and foremost: new people, do you feel daunted? This isn't just a small club of people with an extreme compulsion toward an abnormal fixation. Any question's welcome, just as long as you don't go insult everyone who responds, and casual talk is too.
Diagnostics on guest IPs wouldn't confirm anything I don't think, in part due to the amount of bots (like that time when there were 1000+ login attempts at once from the same close range). As for guests vastly outweighing the amount of registered visitors, that's been the case in every single place I've seen.
While I think the "problem" is less about usergroups or the amount of them than it is about the active memberbase, some of them do seem a bit superfluous. The feel of casual hierarchy added a sense of fun when I first joined, but there were various other such "fun" systems in place like badges, karma (>_<), and other things that were taken out because they didn't serve a purpose beyond messing around. That said, there is a reason behind each of them, at least the ones visible below the users online.
Oldbie is a bit strange considering how an outsider might look at it, but I do think there should be a bit more attention given to members who have stuck around since everyone was fanboying over the Old Man glitch in 2004. I could be wrong; I questioned it the more I typed it. Crash and Burn was a ROM hacking team, but only one member that didn't have another usergroup was in it, so I hid it from the front page list. It's in the same category as the GlitchBattle Alpha Testers. VetCon (…that sounds cool!) is less about seniority than about being one of the few who was able to edit the site when that required Abwayax providing you direct access to the FTP server. Yes, they had full access to everything, as did some now in Member+ and Staff who used it less often. Though with how exclusive Wiki Contributor is, it can be considered roughly of the same weight. Wiki Contributor can't quite be considered "staff of the site", though I brought up the point recently and it will become closer to that. The 50 post thing is outdated; the boards are Forum Games, MS Paint Adventures, and Role Plays, and only require registration and 1 post now. As for subgroups, I think that would overcomplicate things in a similar manner to having more groups.
The colorful palette in the Who's Online section has always been an integral part of the layout to me. It just looks so good, and just subdued enough! Though maybe it does give the wrong impression to have all those colors and designations visible as soon as someone clicks the link to the forums. It's worth considering. For obvious reasons I can't speak for newcomers.

#### Re: Making GCLF less intimidating to newcomers

Posted by: bwill11
Date: 2019-08-16 10:08:22
I don't think the colors in the who's online section is a problem, I think it's good too.

#### Re: Making GCLF less intimidating to newcomers

Posted by: James-the-Charizard
Date: 2019-08-16 13:12:40
I didn't think such a simple statement on how I am (generally not starting discussions due to shyness even though I am social) would turn into a thread like this… :o

#### Re: Making GCLF less intimidating to newcomers

Posted by: Torchickens
Date: 2019-08-16 14:54:14
Exactly; everyone is different and not everyone feels like starting discussions. This said we hope none of this has become intrusive James and are sorry if it has. (I feel it shouldn't have been brought up in the talk page nor you named/mentioned without your consent).
On the theme of the thread, maybe we should create a kind of "getting into glitching" guide that starts with basics on glitches, finding glitches, hacking at first and goes into depth. This could be a wiki article but we could also mirror a FAQ on the forums. I think the idea was suggested elsewhere (but in the context of 8F) but there isn't an article yet other than the GB programming guide which requires some technical knowledge.

#### Re: Making GCLF less intimidating to newcomers

Posted by: James-the-Charizard
Date: 2019-08-16 15:03:55
No it's ok! I would like to thank you 3 for being friendly about this whole thing. ;D

#### Re: Making GCLF less intimidating to newcomers

Posted by: Torchickens
Date: 2019-08-16 15:15:02

> No it's ok! I would like to thank you 3 for being friendly about this whole thing. ;D

OK that's good to hear ^^. You're welcome :3

#### Re: Making GCLF less intimidating to newcomers

Posted by: James-the-Charizard
Date: 2019-08-16 15:29:44
When I say i'm shy, i'm mainly bad at starting discussions. I made this account so I could comment on forums if I wanted to, roleplays are my strength to be honest. :???:

#### Re: Making GCLF less intimidating to newcomers

Posted by: Torchickens
Date: 2019-08-16 15:39:19
That's all right. :)
(If you like, we welcome off-topic forum games and writing, though not sure if any role plays are still running).
With me, sometimes I take a long time to process what to say; so typing on the spot may awkward for me (though it varies at times). That can also be why say hypothetically if on Discord and there is a group effort I may find coordinating things hard.

#### Re: Making GCLF less intimidating to newcomers

Posted by: James-the-Charizard
Date: 2019-08-16 15:44:59
I see…
I wish I was able to add more information on the Glitch Pokémon I tested a lot but unfortunately I couldn't figure out Pokédex data. (It was 0xDC, that happened a few days ago.) The big reason I wanted to figure it out was it varied so much… Some lock ups, some ended, some crashed.
I must concede I was using Gameshark codes to get the Pokémon to appear… :-\

#### Re: Making GCLF less intimidating to newcomers

Posted by: Torchickens
Date: 2019-08-16 16:22:52

> I see…
> I wish I was able to add more information on the Glitch Pokémon I tested a lot but unfortunately I couldn't figure out Pokédex data. (It was 0xDC, that happened a few days ago.) The big reason I wanted to figure it out was it varied so much… Some lock ups, some ended, some crashed.
> I must concede I was using Gameshark codes to get the Pokémon to appear… :-\

Ahh thanks. ^^ Feel free though to contribute anything no matter small at your own pace. :) Userpage notes are fine too.
I can answer your question now, sorry for the delay.
That's OK ~, the GameShark codes don't matter in this case.
Technically it would have too many to count (virtually anything that can fit) Pokédex data for being in SRAM (including anything that fits; so with the right save file it could be "ABC" etc. with any height/weight (though within the structure so it could be 9'9 but not 999'999) you want.
As it is in SRAM, not ROM; it can be edited in game. An idea might be to repeatedly corrupt the SRAM with glitch Pokémon sprites, and with arbitrary code execution you can edit the entry with precision.
In this case bringing up the Pokédex menu after catching it in battle reads 0:AA00.
0:AA00 is in the Hall of Fame data, so in theory corrupting your Hall of Fame data would at the same time corrupt the Pokédex entry - there may however be timing complications. I'm unsure which Pokémon would count for corrupting it and whether MissingNo./'M is suitable, but larger corruptions may count.
Proof of concept:
[img]https://i.imgur.com/jm7x6aJ.png[/img]
^ A replicable way to do this is to open the debugger on BGB (through right click) and then on the window>Debug>Access breakpoints>enter in condition "DE=$AA00" and add the check>catch the Pokémon>modify the data at AA00>click back on the game.
A complication may be depending on which emulator/platform you're using, the SRAM may be locked at that time; bringing up "9"s for the category data instead.
In English Yellow, a similar documented exploit (link) can be done with 0xF9 but with items instead of Hall of Fame entry data.
Hope this is useful.

#### Re: Making GCLF less intimidating to newcomers

Posted by: James-the-Charizard
Date: 2019-08-16 17:13:39
AHA!! Glitch Pokémon Sprites! That'll give me some fun exploring these bizarre Pokédex entries… I tried location changes and item slots before.
Thanks for figuring that out btw. ^v^
(Am I allowed to call you Evie? ._.')

#### Re: Making GCLF less intimidating to newcomers

Posted by: Torchickens
Date: 2019-08-16 18:43:57

> AHA!! Glitch Pokémon Sprites! That'll give me some fun exploring these bizarre Pokédex entries… I tried location changes and item slots before.
> Thanks for figuring that out btw. ^v^
> (Am I allowed to call you Evie? ._.')

You're welcome :> Mm, I believe this and Yellow's 0xF9 are among the only SRAM Pokédex entries that can viably be changed. However, there is another in the Japanese versions of Yellow.
Sure! Go ahead ^^ (I'm fine with Evie and like to use that name here though I keep my surname private).

#### Re: Making GCLF less intimidating to newcomers

Posted by: James-the-Charizard
Date: 2019-08-16 18:59:23
Good… I find it easier to call someone by a name (like in this case Evie, and like how I prefer being called James)… ;)
The one thing that has certainly intrigued me is the Glitch Pokémon in other versions. (Not really the hybrids since they are the same, but stuff like the #205 family, and how 0xFB varies heavily between versions. (English RB, 'M 'N g is an Onix hybrid, but a Glitch Pokémon in Spanish RB, etc.)
But hey, I guess it's what keeps us researching! :P

#### Re: Making GCLF less intimidating to newcomers

Posted by: James-the-Charizard
Date: 2019-08-16 20:33:47
Ill admit this (as off-topic as it is), I will tend to be more active elsewhere on the internet. Mainly on art websites, Discord, heck, even YouTube to an extent. ;)
Previous Page

- 1
- 2

Next Page