60b05bcd90
The Port asks whether the blend is evaluated on sRGB-encoded values or linearised and re-encoded. It is answered by one register field I already log, and the answer is the same on every draw of two full captures. RB_COLOR_INFO.color_format is k_8_8_8_8 (0) on 2402/2402 splash draws and 33779/33791 draws of the boot-through-title capture; the other 12 are k_32_FLOAT and k_16_16_FLOAT and are not colour passes. k_8_8_8_8_GAMMA (1) appears ZERO times, and color_exp_bias is 0 everywhere so nothing stands in for a gamma either. The mechanism is Canary's own source, not our inference: k_8_8_8_8_GAMMA is the ONLY colour format around which a piecewise-linear gamma<->linear conversion is applied (spirv_shader_translator.h:510 PWLGammaToLinear / LinearToPWLGamma, render_target_cache.h:720, dxbc_shader_translator_om.cc). With k_8_8_8_8 there is none, so the blender operates on the stored values as they are. So a renderer that linearises before blending and re-encodes after is doing a different operation -- and the difference is gamma-shaped and exactly zero on unblended pixels, which is the divergence signature the port reports. Also renamed my units-per-second pre-registration off the 'h4' prefix: the Port's BLOCKED.md numbers this blend-space question H4 and two different H4s in one corpus is how a citation goes wrong.
Sylpheed
A clean-room reverse engineering and port project for Project Sylpheed: Arc of Deception (Xbox 360, 2007).
Three things live here, in one repository so that a change spanning them lands as one commit:
| The decoders | crates/sylpheed-formats — the disc's formats, read and verified disc-wide |
| The port | port/ — a Godot 4 project, plus crates/sylpheed-export which converts a disc into the open asset tree it reads |
| The corpus | docs/re/ — what has been reverse engineered, with its evidence, its retractions and its dead ends |
You need your own copy of the game. No game content is in this repository and none ever will be. The exporter reads the disc you supply.
The oracle is the real game
sylpheed-cliand the Explorer are tools for verifying our decoding. They are hypotheses under test and they have been wrong. When something must be checked against the truth, the truth is the game running in Xenia Canary, captured — not any renderer of ours.
This is stated first because getting it backwards is the most expensive mistake this project has made.
Layout
crates/
sylpheed-formats/ the decoders. Disc-wide verified; the corpus is its spec
sylpheed-cli/ headless tools -- render a screen, dump a table, probe audio
sylpheed-viewer/ the Explorer: a human's window onto the disc. STATIC data only
sylpheed-export/ disc -> the open, moddable asset tree
port/ the Godot 4 project. Reads open formats ONLY
authored/ decisions that are NOT on the disc, each with its reason
data/
base/ generated by the exporter. Gitignored, never hand-edited
mods/ drop-in overrides. Yours
docs/
re/ the corpus: findings, refutations, method traps
game/ how the game is navigated -- menus, modals, flight
port/ the port's mission, its handoff contract, modding rules
agents/ how the agent team works together
tools/ capture harnesses, probes, the share tool
exchange/ transient inter-agent files. NOT in git
docker/ the agent containers
Where to start
docs/re/INDEX.md— what is decodeddocs/re/REFUTED.md— what has been tested and dieddocs/re/METHOD.md— traps this project has already paid fordocs/game/navigation.md— how the game is navigateddocs/port/MODDING.md— why the asset tree looks the way it does
Xenia Canary is a separate repository: it is a fork tracking upstream, and it carries our instrumentation.
Conventions
Confidence is per claim, never per document: ✅ CONFIRMED · 🟡 PROBABLE ·
❔ HYPOTHESIS · ❌ REFUTED. A withdrawn result is kept with its reasoning
rather than deleted — that is why the numbers here can be trusted.