Last iteration I read the scattered missing runs as cut dialogue. Checking the
other languages refutes that for most of them.
Only two voice languages exist: tables.pak holds eng\sounds.tbl (4418 banks)
and jpn\sounds.tbl (5136), and NO fra/deu/esp/ita. The other four
localisations are subtitle-only, which is itself a fact the corpus did not
record.
The English set is a strict subset of the Japanese one:
eng jpn
listed 4418 5136
resolved 4175 4383
missing 268 60
lacked by
the other 0 718
Every id missing in Japanese is also missing in English, and NONE is missing
in Japanese but present in English. So the 268 split cleanly:
208 exist in Japanese, not in English -- recorded in the original and
never dubbed. A localisation gap, not cut content.
60 absent from both -- genuinely cut, including all 44 VOICE_E_ (listed
0 times in either language) plus 16 others.
Per family eng/jpn: A 683/771, B 383/423, C 366/474, D 387/546. The 718
Japanese-only banks include whole families English never had -- VOICE_ADAN_
(110), VOICE_ZZZZ_ (104), VOICE_TCAF_ (41), VOICE_RHIN_ (27).
So VOICE_E_ survives as the one genuinely-cut family, and my "short runs of
cut dialogue" reading was wrong: those lines are on the disc, in Japanese. The
previous text is kept above the correction.
This is why the "measured on English only" limit was worth writing down rather
than quietly generalising -- the second language changed the conclusion.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01PMRJjbxLqZtsb5Vb7KunPE
a3fd51b380