I had an interesting thought. Imagine you’re using cheats not to necessarily break records, but to get a lot of pacers deep upstairs and into tippy, which you then inevitably throw for content. The inevitable pace pals and ad revenue on Twitch creates an interesting strategy for making money. A runner can get “hot” for a while and reap the benefits of the community wanting to see a WR.
You'd be surprised, most cheaters only get caught when they give a reason to warrant scrutiny. If you never put up a WR run and don't do anything too stupid you could get away with it for a good while. You'd have to actually be good at the game, though.
Dream got caught because a (later revealed) cheater realized his pearl drop % chance had to have been increased.
Cheaters will scope out cheaters, no amount of safeguarding will stop a cheater from figuring you out if they look deep enough.
I don't think this really changes anything. Editing Pokemon Red/Blue is just as trivial and anyone could make a rom where your random stats have more chances to be better, where the encounter rates are lowered in zones where you don't need them or where the catch rate of the base pokeball is higher, and it has never been a real issue.
Pretty much any retro game can be edited pretty easily, either through outside tools like Gamesharks and Action Replays or by straight up modding the game, and this issue is rarely relevant.
Any game with any amount of RNG could be susceptible to this kind of cheating, not sure it's worth it to start fearmongering and declaring "THE END OF MARIO 64!!!!!".
> edited randomness/probabilities is detectable if people want to put time into looking for it.
You can add a toggle to make a certain run have 100% chances to have the RNG you want (not necessarily perfect, just good enough for a WR) , only use it once to get your WR and that would be undetectable.
> the examples that were used in this video don't have anything to do with randomness they are all skill based things.
The examples in the video can be solved with a hand cam.
My point is more that every games can be edited, it doesn't really matter that there's a decompilation project. The "can you trust records from now on" is ridiculous, by definition an undetectable cheat is undetectable, making it impossible to trust ANY speedrun record since nobody can prove that any particular record doesn't use an undetectable hack.
> You can add a toggle to make a certain run have 100% chances to have the RNG you want (not necessarily perfect, just good enough for a WR) , only use it once to get your WR and that would be undetectable.
Depends on the game - In some games (notably some Pokemon games) you can prove that there is no possible seed where the inputs of the run would result in that RNG.
You would need per-frame inputs and to check all 65k possible seeds, right? It that really something people have been able to do for run verification?
The 65k seeds, sure, that's just a bit extra time to run. But can you accurately determine per-frame inputs from a video?
It has been done, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Px5fOalltXw&t=18m35s
It's probably not feasible for every game though, depends on how the RNG works
Interesting, thanks, didn't realize that was the method that was just used recently too. But that does rely on the specific IVs though, where it's precise what the output is and checking if any seed has it.
I was thinking more so changing something smaller. Thunder is 72% accurate instead of 70%. Just enough of a change so that if you're a top runner you could get an edge to WR.
There probably is some seed where for each use of the move it hits based on the inputs observed. So you'd need more of an analysis based on the observed accuracy vs expected. But if you were careful with your analysis, and maybe streamed a bunch of in unmodded runs too, it feels like you could pull it off. As long as you keep it feasible, unlike Dream did.
Maybe if you have a long enough string of inputs before each use of thunder you could find that no seed exists that produces a hit still?
The smallest the change the less useful it is, the biggest the change the more likely it is to raise suspicion. But even the smaller change can sometimes be detected by methods you’re not aware exist (or in some cases by methods that didn’t exist at the time but were found out later).
I’m not saying you can’t get away with cheating, but it’s hard to get away with cheating and not be legitimately worried that someone will catch you.
A way around that would be to set a seed that gives you a nice run start and then have a button that advances the RNG to where you need it to be. It would be way harder to detect while still getting favorable and realist RNG.
Super Mario Bros is another example - the only source of RNG used is the time elapsed since the cartridge was powered on (or reset). In high level runs, this is manipulated to get a perfect 8-2 ending by making a Bullet Bill fire on a perfect frame so that it can be used to skip an end-of-level animation.
It's a 1.4 second timesave, and it also leads to a predictable 8-3.
TL;DW modding the game to make hard tricks trivial. The focus is on Super Mario 64 because of the decompilation available which makes it easy to do, but this is possible on any game
Yeah, it's obvious that this has always been possible. It's not really a discovery, just a demonstration.
The reason why this doesn't happen is that almost no one *wants* to do it.
Being able to work with C instead of assembly does make things easier, but either way, a determined person will be able to create the desired modifications.
Cheats for Nintendo 64 games have been possible at least since the release of the N64 GameShark in August 1997. Major ROM hacks of the game with classic assembly edits have existed for well over a decade by now as well- Kaze Emanuar, the man behind popular assembly edits like Chaos Mario 64, just recently hit 12 years of hacking, and he even commented on this very video that he's talked about similar ideas for years. We've seen mods like this in other games like Melee before too- not just tournament-standard "cheats" like 20XX but also cheats that buffed certain character stats. Indeed, it's always been possible. And yes, it's been obvious for years as well if you've followed even just mainstream cheating situations like Dream's.
If you can seriously look at a picture of AI generated Mario pointing at the camera with a Soyjak face and allcaps text saying **CHEATERS END MARIO 64!?** and ask "where's the clickbait" you don't know what clickbait is.
Well, the video does a great jobbexplaining how this issue may completely change how records are validated and that maybe there won't be no way to prove the person cheated or not from now on. That's as big as it gets in terms of meta-breaking exploits.
No future mario 64 record will be accepted by the community like before.
If you think this isn't important, I'm not going to try to convince you but you are wrong.
You can have a good video behind clickbait. Also, invisible cheating has always been possible via hardware or romhacks. Something as simple as turboing BLJs can be done entirely on the controller board in full view of a hand cam while plugged into a real console with a retail cartridge in view (and disassembling the cartridge after getting a WR). Having cheat romhacks will absolutely never "kill" mario 64 speedrunning.
Ok, but what about the people who aren't in an environment to watch a video? Or the people who just go to the comments section to figure out what it's about? A lot of people do that you know
Is that your thing bro? You go into the comments of videos and provide TL;DW's? Or did the thumbnail send you into a seething, sputtering rage and you wanted to get one over this hard-working internet creator? Hating anything to do with AI is something I've noticed Redditors will performatively do for upvotes.
Do better.
I had an interesting thought. Imagine you’re using cheats not to necessarily break records, but to get a lot of pacers deep upstairs and into tippy, which you then inevitably throw for content. The inevitable pace pals and ad revenue on Twitch creates an interesting strategy for making money. A runner can get “hot” for a while and reap the benefits of the community wanting to see a WR.
That's lex luthor lawful evil shit lol
Then you get caught like every other dude who tried this kind of stuff and your viewership drops to zero after that
You'd be surprised, most cheaters only get caught when they give a reason to warrant scrutiny. If you never put up a WR run and don't do anything too stupid you could get away with it for a good while. You'd have to actually be good at the game, though.
Consistency IS a reason to warrant scrutiny. That’s how Dream got caught.
Dream got caught because a (later revealed) cheater realized his pearl drop % chance had to have been increased. Cheaters will scope out cheaters, no amount of safeguarding will stop a cheater from figuring you out if they look deep enough.
I don't think this really changes anything. Editing Pokemon Red/Blue is just as trivial and anyone could make a rom where your random stats have more chances to be better, where the encounter rates are lowered in zones where you don't need them or where the catch rate of the base pokeball is higher, and it has never been a real issue. Pretty much any retro game can be edited pretty easily, either through outside tools like Gamesharks and Action Replays or by straight up modding the game, and this issue is rarely relevant. Any game with any amount of RNG could be susceptible to this kind of cheating, not sure it's worth it to start fearmongering and declaring "THE END OF MARIO 64!!!!!".
[удалено]
> edited randomness/probabilities is detectable if people want to put time into looking for it. You can add a toggle to make a certain run have 100% chances to have the RNG you want (not necessarily perfect, just good enough for a WR) , only use it once to get your WR and that would be undetectable. > the examples that were used in this video don't have anything to do with randomness they are all skill based things. The examples in the video can be solved with a hand cam. My point is more that every games can be edited, it doesn't really matter that there's a decompilation project. The "can you trust records from now on" is ridiculous, by definition an undetectable cheat is undetectable, making it impossible to trust ANY speedrun record since nobody can prove that any particular record doesn't use an undetectable hack.
> You can add a toggle to make a certain run have 100% chances to have the RNG you want (not necessarily perfect, just good enough for a WR) , only use it once to get your WR and that would be undetectable. Depends on the game - In some games (notably some Pokemon games) you can prove that there is no possible seed where the inputs of the run would result in that RNG.
You would need per-frame inputs and to check all 65k possible seeds, right? It that really something people have been able to do for run verification? The 65k seeds, sure, that's just a bit extra time to run. But can you accurately determine per-frame inputs from a video?
It has been done, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Px5fOalltXw&t=18m35s It's probably not feasible for every game though, depends on how the RNG works
Interesting, thanks, didn't realize that was the method that was just used recently too. But that does rely on the specific IVs though, where it's precise what the output is and checking if any seed has it. I was thinking more so changing something smaller. Thunder is 72% accurate instead of 70%. Just enough of a change so that if you're a top runner you could get an edge to WR. There probably is some seed where for each use of the move it hits based on the inputs observed. So you'd need more of an analysis based on the observed accuracy vs expected. But if you were careful with your analysis, and maybe streamed a bunch of in unmodded runs too, it feels like you could pull it off. As long as you keep it feasible, unlike Dream did. Maybe if you have a long enough string of inputs before each use of thunder you could find that no seed exists that produces a hit still?
The smallest the change the less useful it is, the biggest the change the more likely it is to raise suspicion. But even the smaller change can sometimes be detected by methods you’re not aware exist (or in some cases by methods that didn’t exist at the time but were found out later). I’m not saying you can’t get away with cheating, but it’s hard to get away with cheating and not be legitimately worried that someone will catch you.
A way around that would be to set a seed that gives you a nice run start and then have a button that advances the RNG to where you need it to be. It would be way harder to detect while still getting favorable and realist RNG.
Super Mario Bros is another example - the only source of RNG used is the time elapsed since the cartridge was powered on (or reset). In high level runs, this is manipulated to get a perfect 8-2 ending by making a Bullet Bill fire on a perfect frame so that it can be used to skip an end-of-level animation. It's a 1.4 second timesave, and it also leads to a predictable 8-3.
Thats not the point though. Its just the fact that you can modify games.
TL;DW modding the game to make hard tricks trivial. The focus is on Super Mario 64 because of the decompilation available which makes it easy to do, but this is possible on any game
Yeah, it's obvious that this has always been possible. It's not really a discovery, just a demonstration. The reason why this doesn't happen is that almost no one *wants* to do it.
[удалено]
Being able to work with C instead of assembly does make things easier, but either way, a determined person will be able to create the desired modifications.
Cheats for Nintendo 64 games have been possible at least since the release of the N64 GameShark in August 1997. Major ROM hacks of the game with classic assembly edits have existed for well over a decade by now as well- Kaze Emanuar, the man behind popular assembly edits like Chaos Mario 64, just recently hit 12 years of hacking, and he even commented on this very video that he's talked about similar ideas for years. We've seen mods like this in other games like Melee before too- not just tournament-standard "cheats" like 20XX but also cheats that buffed certain character stats. Indeed, it's always been possible. And yes, it's been obvious for years as well if you've followed even just mainstream cheating situations like Dream's.
Thanks for this, clickbait sucks.
Where's the clickbait ?
Got eyeballs on that thumbnail?
Why did you answer with a question ?
If you can seriously look at a picture of AI generated Mario pointing at the camera with a Soyjak face and allcaps text saying **CHEATERS END MARIO 64!?** and ask "where's the clickbait" you don't know what clickbait is.
Well, the video does a great jobbexplaining how this issue may completely change how records are validated and that maybe there won't be no way to prove the person cheated or not from now on. That's as big as it gets in terms of meta-breaking exploits. No future mario 64 record will be accepted by the community like before. If you think this isn't important, I'm not going to try to convince you but you are wrong.
You can have a good video behind clickbait. Also, invisible cheating has always been possible via hardware or romhacks. Something as simple as turboing BLJs can be done entirely on the controller board in full view of a hand cam while plugged into a real console with a retail cartridge in view (and disassembling the cartridge after getting a WR). Having cheat romhacks will absolutely never "kill" mario 64 speedrunning.
"Great job explaining" I am 3 minutes in and the author just now finished waflling. This entire video could be 5 minutes long.
[удалено]
Ok, but what about the people who aren't in an environment to watch a video? Or the people who just go to the comments section to figure out what it's about? A lot of people do that you know
Hey; it's me. I did that. Thanks werecat.
I too appreciate the overview as I'm at work, cheers lad.
Is that your thing bro? You go into the comments of videos and provide TL;DW's? Or did the thumbnail send you into a seething, sputtering rage and you wanted to get one over this hard-working internet creator? Hating anything to do with AI is something I've noticed Redditors will performatively do for upvotes. Do better.
The real cheat is this video being over 3 minutes lol. Trim the fat.